From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Wed Mar 31 10:30:58 2010 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-board); Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:31:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Nx1km-0000dO-5K for llg-board@lojban.org; Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:30:56 -0700 Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:30:56 -0700 From: Robin Lee Powell To: llg-board@lojban.org Subject: [llg-board] Re: NEW VOTE: Motion to amend Message-ID: <20100331173055.GO6084@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: llg-board@lojban.org References: <20100331171330.GL6084@digitalkingdom.org> <20100331172850.GK3000@nvg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100331172850.GK3000@nvg.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-archive-position: 637 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-board@lojban.org X-list: llg-board On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 07:28:50PM +0200, Arnt Richard Johansen wrote: > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:13:30AM -0700, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > > > I move to amend my previous motion to read as follows: > > > > The LLG board will immediately, publically apologize to Remod > > for dropping the ball (I'd like to do this, please). > > > > Further, in direct contravention of previous policy, the LLG > > will publically post our master copy of the CLL, and request > > to Remod that he apply his corrections to that, making in > > effect a new master copy, to be approved by the BPFK as such > > and posted to the website after said approval. > > I second this amendment. > > I initially had reservations about the second part, since asking > Remod to do work for us after we obstructed his PDF could come > across as an insult. But I trust Robin to be able to find a > wording that is suitable to the situation. As before, I'm calling that two votes. Bob? Matt? -Robin -- They say: "The first AIs will be built by the military as weapons." And I'm thinking: "Does it even occur to you to try for something other than the default outcome?" See http://shrunklink.com/cdiz http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/