Received: from localhost ([::1]:46368 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1aZ9PK-0002Pd-Q5; Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:49:34 -0800 Received: from mail-io0-f171.google.com ([209.85.223.171]:34952) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1aZ9PH-0002PL-9n for llg-members@lojban.org; Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:49:32 -0800 Received: by mail-io0-f171.google.com with SMTP id g203so110388779iof.2 for ; Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:49:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=33hOe6vwvM8hiOlhxg7IWOT+zbHLg1Wd7b3QkC3ealQ=; b=IWGvMDZAU4II9HlETDd0VFtKdk90kx5mPiQVSkIP7hv5uvbzp1sLPn19MCuJbGllKS mnB0OubQZIYQzmQKQ2lBxcLDsmykuA/3VJIWdQH4g+Uop7lUlqRFUXJd1tyZ519lS36e 4SGNFUZ8hbk6c/utTyEVwGqhP61B5KUW8dgSa2aEyXQYAfZzmvNFZTGb2Gez6c78eFMV ytPI5qep1XLw3H6sTayKSzR0BFLEKH1COth362mobJY3CwIyedDyFNWJZ5gGNIs4OJw9 6FhouC5AUCwhlJtiU4hq5SWdzNy3BLf4zQK4Tbke0ueR0IaBiKBsJcyogkvHwsjG0osk LcUQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=33hOe6vwvM8hiOlhxg7IWOT+zbHLg1Wd7b3QkC3ealQ=; b=lhxclUIg3m0bMxmFLXkTPgKaGCj+tAq6jsV0y8bMB0OhFNa/hHa/uxW1OxaCzWwVmK EVZDCw4TpRFtS5uOVPWWob/SCrhBll8q2/2LZ9vOanQDUWX51onn2kElsgIuDlGcWUkS G1pvxVCkK8U+Z4F4gn6UNiuHZoW3uQsrMtZgROjC52ez7A4vTqvVRTubi2OdY+D05zh0 XpRxCXICWvc3FoW4hNJQMaBkfVJPFneMJClRmJ5HQmScDFn98/g26YyWfe6oee5uJE4c U63NUnxu0T8TryWMeonapwR3XW+fOoHPTXHmKP4yFuPWQLK7kJc/iIuaPJXhP1DocmE8 CbYQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOQAzuq0JRUAhjU630Yn3Jv+Mb74iwbOmOK/Em0XBl6EA1K05KJQjDzsXxHS36gfzsZ57BGCmVZLplP5Jw== X-Received: by 10.107.168.29 with SMTP id r29mr6761382ioe.12.1456458565429; Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:49:25 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <563CBDA4.5080308@selpahi.de> <9AC7ACDB-A395-4564-8340-20876DAB07CA@gmail.com> <56CC9C72.4040908@lojban.org> <56CF4028.70700@lojban.org> In-Reply-To: From: Craig Daniel Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 03:49:16 +0000 Message-ID: To: llg-members@lojban.org X-Spam-Score: -2.0 (--) X-Spam_score: -2.0 X-Spam_score_int: -19 X-Spam_bar: -- Subject: Re: [Llg-members] 2015 Annual Meeting - response to discussion X-BeenThere: llg-members@lojban.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: llg-members@lojban.org Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6614142166150965263==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============6614142166150965263== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11425fb66c2dbc052ca42fae --001a11425fb66c2dbc052ca42fae Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I stand in agreement with la durkavore about the notion that the best process is the one that gets people to put their time into it. On matters of the vision for where that process ends, I endorse each point of Bob's post which started this thread; I consider myself sufficiently unplugged from the work being done to be qualified to opine on how the doers do it. When any of these points becomes a formal motion, it is my intention to vote with the will of those actively performing work in the right direction, so that the LLG may support the current projects which give the language the support it needs. On Thu, Feb 25, 2016, 7:02 PM Alex Burka wrote: > Bob, with respect, you aren't the byfy jatna currently. And the BPFK is > not currently functioning as a bureaucracy where the jatna directs > everyone's activities. It is an independent entity from the LLG for a > reason. > > People don't work on Lojban as a full-time job, which means time and > motivation are scarce resources. When we bicker about what everyone should > be working on, we don't get anything done. If folks are motivated to work > on the content of a future edition of the CLL, they should do that. Editing > a draft is in no way equivalent to an official change! > > A work-in-progress is hosted on Github, which means there is always a > trail of who changed what and when, for us to use when we go about > officially approving things. It's on Github because the people who have > been working on CLL 1.1 and 2.0 found it convenient (and achieved results, > I might add). If anyone wants to contribute but has trouble with Github, I > encourage them to ask for help. > > - mu'o mi'e la durkavore > > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Bob LeChevalier > wrote: > >> On 2/23/2016 1:10 PM, Gleki Arxokuna wrote: >> >>> 2016-02-23 20:52 GMT+03:00 Bob LeChevalier >> >: >>> >>> As to the discussion of what LLG should be doing (which I stayed out >>> of), I will try to be brief. >>> >>> IMO, no one should be working on CLL 2.0 at this time (unless the >>> bpfk jatna has chosen to do so as a means of moving byfy work along). >>> >>> >>> I would add that everyone is free and even advised to fork >>> https://github.com/lojban/cll/tree/docbook-prince-cll-2.0 branch on >>> github and continue working on these branches. >>> >>> Of course, they are all unofficial but since it's a lot of work when LLG >>> or BPFK or other entities decide to apply something officially they >>> might need your work. >>> >> >> .oi This is not a useful email. >> >> The average person has no idea how to do anything on github.com, which >> is just a random website name to me. I vaguely recognize "docbook" and >> "prince" as words that Robin has used in talking about the CLL publishing >> effort, but I know nothing more than that (and probably don't want to). >> >> I have no idea why I would fork that address, or what that would >> accomplish. Since most of us have no and aren't involved in publishing >> CLL, we would (and should) have no clue how to "continue working" on >> something that is hopefully almost done. >> >> If you are referring to some version of CLL after Robin's version, you >> seem to have ignored what I just posted that you responded to - that no one >> should be working on them in the absence of some direction by the byfy >> jatna. Otherwise what "work" could meaningfully be done, since a change to >> CLL reflects an official change to the language specification, which can >> only be done byfy. >> >> I suspect that a lot more would be done by new people if people who post >> stuff like this would presume that most people who will read it have no >> idea what is being talked about, and thus include some general context and >> maybe a few links that explain what is being done, by whom, and why someone >> might want to get involved. >> >> -------- >> >> In any event, I posted on the members list as part of the meeting, as a >> response to discussion about goals for LLG as an organization. Specific >> discussions about what to do (on github or elsewhere) and how to do it >> should be moved to the main list, so the meeting can try to focus on making >> decisions. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Llg-members mailing list >> Llg-members@lojban.org >> http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members >> > > _______________________________________________ > Llg-members mailing list > Llg-members@lojban.org > http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members > --001a11425fb66c2dbc052ca42fae Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I stand in agreement with la durkavore about the notion that= the best process is the one that gets people to put their time into it. On= matters of the vision for where that process ends, I endorse each point of= Bob's post which started this thread; I consider myself sufficiently u= nplugged from the work being done to be qualified to opine on how the doers= do it.

When any of these points becomes a formal motion, it is my i= ntention to vote with the will of those actively performing work in the rig= ht direction, so that the LLG may support the current projects which give t= he language the support it needs.


On Thu, Feb 25, 2016, 7:02 = PM=C2=A0Alex Burka <durka42@gmail.c= om> wrote:
= Bob, with respect, you aren't the byfy jatna currently. And the BPFK is= not currently functioning as a bureaucracy where the jatna directs everyon= e's activities. It is an independent entity from the LLG for a reason.<= div>
People don't work on Lojban as a full-time job, whic= h means time and motivation are scarce resources. When we bicker about what= everyone should be working on, we don't get anything done. If folks ar= e motivated to work on the content of a future edition of the CLL, they sho= uld do that. Editing a draft is in no way equivalent to an official change!=

A work-in-progress is hosted on Github, which mea= ns there is always a trail of who changed what and when, for us to use when= we go about officially approving things. It's on Github because the pe= ople who have been working on CLL 1.1 and 2.0 found it convenient (and achi= eved results, I might add). If anyone wants to contribute but has trouble w= ith Github, I encourage them to ask for help.

- mu= 'o mi'e la durkavore

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Bob LeChevalier <= lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
<= span>On 2/23/2016 1:10 PM, Gleki Arxokuna wrote:
2016-02-23 20:52 GMT+03:00 Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org
 <mailto:lojbab@lo= jban.org>>:

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 As to the discussion of what LLG should be doing (which I sta= yed out
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 of), I will try to be brief.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 IMO, no one should be working on CLL 2.0 at this time (unless= the
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 bpfk jatna has chosen to do so as a means of moving byfy work= along).


 I would add that everyone is free and even advised to fork
https://github.com/lojban/cll/tree/docboo= k-prince-cll-2.0 branch on
github and continue working on these branches.

Of course, they are all unofficial but since it's a lot of work when LL= G
or BPFK or other entities decide to apply something officially they
might need your work.

.oi This is not a useful email.

The average person has no idea how to do anything on github.com, which is just = a random website name to me.=C2=A0 I vaguely recognize "docbook" = and "prince" as words that Robin has used in talking about the CL= L publishing effort, but I know nothing more than that (and probably don= 9;t want to).

I have no idea why I would fork that address, or what that would accomplish= .=C2=A0 Since most of us have no and aren't involved in publishing CLL,= we would (and should) have no clue how to "continue working" on = something that is hopefully almost done.

If you are referring to some version of CLL after Robin's version, you = seem to have ignored what I just posted that you responded to - that no one= should be working on them in the absence of some direction by the byfy jat= na.=C2=A0 Otherwise what "work" could meaningfully be done, since= a change to CLL reflects an official change to the language specification,= which can only be done byfy.

I suspect that a lot more would be done by new people if people who post st= uff like this would presume that most people who will read it have no idea = what is being talked about, and thus include some general context and maybe= a few links that explain what is being done, by whom, and why someone migh= t want to get involved.

--------

In any event, I posted on the members list as part of the meeting, as a res= ponse to discussion about goals for LLG as an organization.=C2=A0 Specific = discussions about what to do (on github or elsewhere) and how to do it shou= ld be moved to the main list, so the meeting can try to focus on making dec= isions.



_______________________________________________
Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@loj= ban.org
http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-membe= rs

_______________________________________________
Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@loj= ban.org
http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-membe= rs
--001a11425fb66c2dbc052ca42fae-- --===============6614142166150965263== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Llg-members mailing list Llg-members@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members --===============6614142166150965263==--