From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Thu Apr 01 00:07:11 2010 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-board); Thu, 01 Apr 2010 00:07:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1NxEUg-0003dV-BH for llg-board@lojban.org; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 00:07:10 -0700 Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 00:07:10 -0700 From: Robin Lee Powell To: llg-board@lojban.org Subject: [llg-board] [alanpost@sunflowerriver.org: Re: [lojban] The CLL, Community Efforts, and An Apology From The Board] Message-ID: <20100401070710.GI6084@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: llg-board@lojban.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-archive-position: 650 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 I thought this was excellent advice; thought I'd share. -Robin ----- Forwarded message from Alan Post ----- Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 18:00:07 -0600 From: Alan Post To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] The CLL, Community Efforts, and An Apology From The Board [This was originally an e-mail sent to Robin directly, and he requested I post it to the list.] On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 04:06:43PM -0700, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > Those all sound like pretty reasonable things to me, albeit a teensy > bit premature. > A small suggestion, which I hope will be interpreted in good faith. I find this comment to be symptomatic of the broader communication pattern between the board members and the community. What if you had said: "That sounds awesome. The fastest way to make that happen is to perform task X." A "teensy bit premature" communicates to me "wait, I'm not ready for that yet." more strongly than it communicates "there are things we've got to do first." It is a comment that I feel pushed away by, rather than included by, for no reason other than word choice. I see this pattern in more than this sentence when those with Official Capacity communicate to the community. I think I understand where it comes from: a) the community is full of (brilliant!) ideas that come from a place of ignorance regarding Lojban. b) the Board has an enormous amount of thankless work that no one appreciates, no one knows they care about, and is not intrinsically rewarding. I can't think of how to better create the kind of dynamic I see between the Board and the community than with this scenario, but the typical response by Board Members also doesn't intrinsically change that dynamic. If anything it perpetuates it: The community "can't" do anything (suggestions are pushed away or downplayed) and the Board isn't going to get any more excited about the work they have to do. Particularly for all those newbies with bad ideas. But you could change that dynamic by refusing to play your part. You have thankless work to do *and* you have to listen to your newbies' breathtakingly bad ideas. What if that were wonderful? What if every misunderstanding was fascinating, and each bad idea one encouraging word away from being a fantastic idea? The Board has far more power than the community to change the dynamic between them. Your community won't do it if you don't. The work you need to do is ground truth, it isn't going to change. Everything you have the power to change is expressed in your word choice. And thank you! You are awesome. I do hope I can meaningfully contribute to making the CLL better. -Alan > The next step is to get the current HTML/OpenOffice version into > DocBook. I've no idea what's going on there; please talk to Remo at > rdentato@gmail.com , or join the #cll IRC channel on freenode. > > -Robin > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 04:58:25PM -0600, Alan Post wrote: > > Having access to the DocBook format of the CLL will be extremely > > beneficial to me. I have wanted to add annotation, reword passages > > I found confusing, and in general have some way of working with it > > that allowed me to track my changes against a baseline. > > > > Thank you for doing this, I look forward to building on this work. > > > > As a small gesture to reciprocate, and to serve as an example of the > > sort of thing I immediately mean, pg. 79 of .i la lojban. mo > > contains a translation error: > > > > http://lojban.org/publications/level0/brochure/comp.html > > > > do [cu] na'e sutra tavla mi [vau] > > You are an other-than-quick talker (or) You are a slow talker. > > > > do [cu] sutra na'e tavla mi [vau] > > You are quickly other-than-talking (or) You are doing something > > other-than-talking, quickly. > > > > I believe both of these translations fail to account for the mi in > > the x2 place of the bridi. > > > > I know you're not talking about .i la lojban. mo in your text > > below, but there are a small number of little things of this sort > > in the CLL as well. When you are trying to learn, a little missed > > detail like that can really interfere with understanding. > > > > I would like to help on this project, and I have a specific edit I > > would like to lobby for: I have trouble navigating the CLL based > > on chapter names, because the metaphors don't resonate with me. I > > wolud like to use the space available to improve the literal > > description of what the chapter covers. > > > > I'd like the opportunity to make a formal proposal on that topic, > > and am happy to trade the ability to make a proposal for doing other > > non-controversial work. > > > > As I thumb through my copy of the book, I'd really like to improve > > some of the tables as well. The one that compares letterrals to > > letter words specifically grabs my attention as something that could > > look much nicer. > > > > May I help? What would be the next step in helping? > > > > -Alan > > > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 03:14:06PM -0700, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > > I am speaking officially on behalf of the LLG board in this email. > > > > > > Since it's this mail that got the ball rolling again, I'll quote it > > > before my reply: > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 03:46:14PM +0200, Remo Dentato wrote: > > > > 2010/3/30 Jorge Llambías > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 3:14 AM, Remo Dentato > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > BTW, I'm still waiting for an answer on wheter I could put the > > > > > > PDF of the revised copy of CLL on the wiki. It has been months > > > > > > now and I don't even know if the they met and deliberated on > > > > > > the matter. > > > > > > > > > > Who did you ask? I don't see any objections arising as long as > > > > > you label it correctly. In any case, if there is some objection, > > > > > the worse that could happen is that it gets removed, so just put > > > > > it there, that's what a wiki is for, you don't ask for > > > > > permission for everything. > > > > > > > > The PDF was a typeset version of the revised CLL that is available > > > > on jbotcan, with exactly the same invite to buy the printed > > > > version from LLG. I just converted from HTML to PDF. > > > > > > > > I put the PDF on the wiki after having asked on the IRC channel > > > > but I had it removed in a matter of hours with the objection that > > > > I had to ask for permission first. I can't remember to whom > > > > exactly I wrote (I should have the email trail stored somewhere) > > > > and I got the answer that the topic would have been discussed and > > > > I would have had an official response from LLG. BTW, I also had > > > > John Cowan supporting my request after I had sent a copy of the > > > > PDF to him as the author. > > > > > > (Remo and most of the people who worked on this new CLL version > > > (hereafter "the new CLL team") and I have already discussed what I'm > > > about to say, just FYI) > > > > > > We are very, very sorry for how this played out. > > > > > > We completely failed the community on this one. I also take a lot > > > of personal responsibility[1], because as secretary, it is my job to > > > make sure that everybody understands what is officially LLG and what > > > isn't, and not only did I *way* over-react, but I did so without > > > being in anything even vaguely approaching full possession of the > > > facts of the matter. > > > > > > We actually did basically decide back in October 2009 that the new > > > CLL team's version was fine and we should do something with it, and > > > then we dropped the ball. Again, very sorry. > > > > > > In the process of failing to deal with this appropriately, we gave > > > Remo, at least, the impression that the LLG does not support or want > > > community projects. Nothing could possibly be farther from the > > > truth! People's pet projects are the *lifeblood* of Lojban. We > > > want more, not less. Don't come to us for permission, just do neat > > > things! > > > > > > (Well, if you're intending to do something that might look like The > > > Official Word on something Lojbanic, as this was, please *do* come > > > talk to us; we promise to try to be much more reasonable! Please do > > > not let us be silent; keep bugging us. We're very busy, and we are > > > not ignoring you on purpose!) > > > > > > Back to the matter at hand. > > > > > > The original idea was to let the new CLL team post their version, > > > clearly marked as "not officiall". Instead, though, I've managed to > > > rope them in to doing a project I've wanted done for *years*: > > > converting the CLL into a decent source format that will generate > > > either linked HTML or a book, cleanly, from one source. > > > > > > To that end, here's what's going to happen: > > > > > > 1. I'm giving the team the official sources of the CLL. They're > > > going to produce a set of diffs between that and what they've done. > > > > > > 2. The BPFK is going to deliberate over said diffs, and hopefully > > > approve them. It should just by typos and stuff anyways. > > > > > > 3. The team is going to turn what they've got into DocBook format, > > > without changing any of the content/text. > > > > > > 4. That docbook will become the new official CLL source. It, and > > > the HTML generated from it, will be posted to lojban.org, free for > > > anyone to download and use as they see fit. > > > > > > This represents a complete reversal of our previous stance against > > > releasing the official source; the community is big enough and > > > robust enough that the time for us to be worried about people > > > ripping us off by, I dunno, schisiming and publishing the CLL for > > > their own profit, or something?, is long past. We are one > > > community, and no-one's going to stop buying CLLs from the LLG just > > > because the official source is available. In the incredibly > > > unlikely event that it *does* make a real difference to our cash > > > flow, we'll talk to the community about that, but I'm not actually > > > worried. > > > > > > My sincerest thanks to the new CLL team for what they've already > > > done, and for taking on the further work I've asked of them. > > > > > > They would, however, appreciate it if other people volunteered to > > > help; it's not an easy or small task. Contact me or Remo if you're > > > interested. > > > > > > -Robin > > > > > > [1]: Some personal notes/perspective; feel free to skip, since it > > > got both longer and whinier than I intended: > > > > > > I've been bitching for *years* about how no-one aronud here does > > > anything, and the new CLL team comes along and does a bunch of > > > stuff (that I'd been meaning to do myself some day!), and instead > > > of happily welcoming them and trying to get them to do a bunch > > > *more* work :), I shut them down. > > > > > > And then, to top it all off, the board discussed it privately, > > > mostly agreed that we were OK with it... and then completely > > > forgot to actually *do* anything. > > > > > > I'm quite angry at myself over this, and I really can't apologize > > > enough. This is exactly the sort of thing that caused me to > > > become a board member in the first place, and I hate that I became > > > (hopefully briefly) the very thing I was once fighting against. > > > > > > My excuse is that I really *have* been personally overwhelmed, and > > > simply haven't had the time to give Lojban decent attention. I > > > will try to do better, and to find more people to help me. > > > > > > -- > > > 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/ > > > > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. > > > To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > > > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. > > > > > > > -- > > te djuno lo do sevzi > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. > > To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. > > > > -- > 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/ > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. > To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. > -- te djuno lo do sevzi -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. ----- End forwarded message ----- -- 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/