From arj@nvg.ntnu.no Mon Apr 26 10:35:52 2010 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-board); Mon, 26 Apr 2010 10:35:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sabre-wulf.nvg.ntnu.no ([129.241.210.67]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1O6SDi-0000VC-9e for llg-board@lojban.org; Mon, 26 Apr 2010 10:35:51 -0700 Received: from hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no (unknown [IPv6:2001:700:300:2000:2a0:c9ff:feab:76e2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sabre-wulf.nvg.ntnu.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5984294789 for ; Mon, 26 Apr 2010 19:35:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no (8.13.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id o3QHZTPV001218 for ; Mon, 26 Apr 2010 19:35:29 +0200 Received: (from arj@localhost) by hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no (8.13.8/8.13.1/Submit) id o3QHZMCs001217 for llg-board@lojban.org; Mon, 26 Apr 2010 19:35:22 +0200 Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 19:35:22 +0200 From: Arnt Richard Johansen To: llg-board@lojban.org Subject: [llg-board] Re: [matt.mattarn@gmail.com: Re: [eric_4001@hotmail.com: lojban]] Message-ID: <20100426173522.GD26115@nvg.org> References: <20100425193936.GW20112@digitalkingdom.org> <20100425195124.GZ3000@nvg.org> <4BD4C9CB.2090105@lojban.org> <20100425233015.GA20112@digitalkingdom.org> <4BD5C8F1.5070507@lojban.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4BD5C8F1.5070507@lojban.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-NVG-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-NVG-MailScanner: Not scanned: please contact your Internet E-Mail Service Provider for details X-MailScanner-From: arj@nvg.ntnu.no X-archive-position: 668 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: arj@nvg.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-board@lojban.org X-list: llg-board On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 01:10:09PM -0400, Robert LeChevalier wrote: > >>I suggest as an alternative, that Robin determine the number of > >>CLLs shipped this year, and give Matt the $1 he asks, for all > >>books since the beginning of the year. For domestic book orders > >>by postal mail, we probably have that much slop covered in the > >>existing charges, though probably not on UPS and international > >>orders. > >> > >>Then, when the updated online CLL is made available (which I > >>presume will not be long), we lower the price of CLL as we had > >>already planned to, by $14 (to $25) and increase the shipping > >>charge by $4 or $5 to all destinations (Matt should have a better > >>idea on how well the existing charge is covering what he spends > >>without any payment to him), and increase Matt's fee to $5 per > >>book. > > > > > >I agree with all that, except that I say we make the price changes > >immediately. > > No strong objection. > > But how far are we from having that updated CLL online, that it makes a > lot of difference? > > That being said, if Arnt likes an immediate price change rather than > waiting a hopefully short time, I'll make it unanimous. If you would like to treat that as an amendment, I vote in favour of the plan to pay Matt for his services, and make the price changes immediately. -- Arnt Richard Johansen http://arj.nvg.org/ Let's have some real examples from a real, non-English language.