Received: from localhost ([::1]:47937 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1YN6xT-0002JS-0e; Sun, 15 Feb 2015 13:42:31 -0800 Received: from earth.ccil.org ([192.190.237.11]:46964) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1YN6xN-0002JG-6K for llg-members@lojban.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2015 13:42:29 -0800 Received: from cowan by earth.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1YN6xL-0004LC-3f for llg-members@lojban.org; Sun, 15 Feb 2015 16:42:23 -0500 Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2015 16:42:23 -0500 From: John Cowan To: llg-members@lojban.org Message-ID: <20150215214223.GE12612@mercury.ccil.org> References: <54D471BB.2070605@lojban.org> <54D66BA8.5040607@lojban.org> <08041A2E-FC72-4E80-AAB4-468A1A3C4DB4@gmail.com> <54DA533B.2090803@lojban.org> <54DD2B86.2020506@lojban.org> <54E0D33B.6040602@lojban.org> <54E10E14.1010201@lojban.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <54E10E14.1010201@lojban.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_bar: - Subject: Re: [Llg-members] Motion: BPFK Reauthorization (amendment) X-BeenThere: llg-members@lojban.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: llg-members@lojban.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG scripsit: > The motion as mukti wrote it basically says that the jatna by > himself appoints members of BPFK. Such a jatna could indeed stop > *anyone* he wanted from joining BPFK for whatever reason. Whether > we are seriously at risk of such a problem, I can't say. mukti > seems to think that parliamentary procedure takes care of this > problem, and I am not competent to argue the matter. I'm the chair of a working group (WG) which reports to a steering committee (SC). An earlier WG had the SC appoint the chair and the members, which had the difficulty that when members dropped out, there was no procedure for the SC to appoint replacements. In three years, the WG lost more than half its membership. So when the SC appointed me to the chair of the new WG, I insisted on the right to appoint and remove members myself. However, I have to accept or reject applicants for membership publicly, and if I remove anyone, I have to do that publicly too. In any case, anyone can appeal my decision to the SC. This prevents me from blatantly stacking the WG with people who agree with me, but also means that when someone applies for membership who seems willing to work, I can just point a finger and zap, they are a member. If I make a mistake, I can fix it. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org Some people open all the Windows; wise wives welcome the spring by moving the Unix. --Advertisement for Unix Book Units (U.K.) (see http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/unix3image.gif) _______________________________________________ Llg-members mailing list Llg-members@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members