Received: from localhost ([::1]:60232 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1aa4TS-000222-5K; Sun, 28 Feb 2016 08:45:38 -0800 Received: from mail-ig0-f172.google.com ([209.85.213.172]:34216) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1aa4TL-00020s-Hp for llg-members@lojban.org; Sun, 28 Feb 2016 08:45:36 -0800 Received: by mail-ig0-f172.google.com with SMTP id g6so69007463igt.1 for ; Sun, 28 Feb 2016 08:45:31 -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=lrfXbK52w/ett3DQKFVp6p40hJSchwVAhkIpcQ6951M=; b=JgMZxtljoZjt9reSySqPN6UD0/3qfmMsrx0OhRfz7I6Dzs7OO5hVQpzknMcijpDtx+ 2fhxAIme8cBynBxbs6fUflLf3kYJosC9yQGTglR3FUjy6+HwCGsPLzpclIbtyXtBzE9h W8YHRkaSssYXxLX0IaQe8affmnc60eFKRZIgeAx5JCw1/A6m3QQpoMRJUxXrGSFTrO+t SWHFAl/CCoW+0rRtDrMqXSB+eccI/ZVYn8OFoXtx4YB4FdECt1WDuDhNnh/+JyHxqGW9 wIm6rZWVE/NS2dTSJKrgxhwyjHTeI+gZicJYSjIqjgsRqdqjHg3pi+TI4I0m4TpbHSS2 0eFg== 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=lrfXbK52w/ett3DQKFVp6p40hJSchwVAhkIpcQ6951M=; b=IM45BDuRq3RGitFsa0USCHUSbib7PCxQpZUqZyRXFBlt1ETQkBmc0KyWgrVy5iBM5Q a8KT/YhCKUEVpuK52/BdzyhBP6YFO1tTxw8uXKCFPiQ3vuJiTNOkY/gsVKAYznMrMuW1 U0VVIZloxONEvzlT/pNbSAwaqxCSTGm8Vtsh5Cj9pxjSI1V+gEHXBuOYvz0ORuHYktrG 0k9GmkqoGKVKsFgqIxbV4ziVmxZI0lClJZEGE2mpkcfpac/cL1rEDHlC6x+Vpg2itB2m vm1sZnqzMRkSrkzS9HAGSBLTxX1olINd1fRHl0VmaGLarFcfuf+WgUczi2bTGE14mRrQ qbRQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJIYj6/Osrp6gBgbDgmk3ww28TQg0eMaiDfeNsiudW7Dhx+vNmHRPk9ORgZGiGPriaPXVx66S8RqrhQWxw== X-Received: by 10.50.150.2 with SMTP id ue2mr6510471igb.87.1456677925420; Sun, 28 Feb 2016 08:45:25 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4D74856F-2DE5-4D2D-B748-86FE1EA42ECC@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4D74856F-2DE5-4D2D-B748-86FE1EA42ECC@gmail.com> From: Craig Daniel Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2016 16:45:15 +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] Demand for depriving Gleki of his administratorship and of official-pretending accounts. 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="===============1925388442066742755==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============1925388442066742755== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113671384c044e052cd742a1 --001a113671384c044e052cd742a1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Are there any policies against doing the things described? If not, I think it might be preferable to simply create some, and to direct Gleki and others with such access to act in accordance with them in the future. But there certainly *should* be such. On Sat, Feb 27, 2016, 2:43 PM Karen Stein wrote: > In response to Guskant's demand that gleki lose control of the wiki and > various other things... > > While I do not have personal knowledge of the various issues presented if > I assume her statements are accurate then I believe gleki went overboard. > It is important that people new to lojban have materials that are accurate > statements about it, LLG, etc. This means that only officially approved > materials should be clearly presented as such. This means that materials > which are not need to specifically state they are not preferably in an > obvious way. As part of this I consider it unconscionable that the > statement that ideal behind lojban is unambiguous communication. This was > developed with a great deal of thought and discussion by LLG (in some of > which I participated). > > On the other hand gleki has contributed much time and effort to lojbanic > outreach and other projects. This means that he should be supported in > developing his materials. They just need to be differentiated from official > ones. I also hope he continues to work within the Board understanding that > Guskant's demands are meant, I think, only to correct some poor decisions > on his part. > > karis > > On February 27, 2016 3:02:07 AM EST, guskant > wrote: > >Introduction. > > > >Dear LLG members, > > > >This is an open letter of my simple demand. > > _______________________________________________ > Llg-members mailing list > Llg-members@lojban.org > http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members > --001a113671384c044e052cd742a1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Are there any policies against doing the things described?

If not, I think it might be preferable to simply create some= , and to direct Gleki and others with such access to act in accordance with= them in the future. But there certainly *should* be such.


On Sat, Feb 27, 2016, 2:43 = PM=C2=A0Karen Stein <comcaresvc= s@gmail.com> wrote:
In respo= nse to Guskant's demand that gleki lose control of the wiki and various= other things...

While I do not have personal knowledge of the various issues presented if I= assume her statements are accurate then I believe gleki went overboard. It= is important that people new to lojban have materials that are accurate st= atements about it, LLG, etc. This means that only officially approved mater= ials should be clearly presented as such. This means that materials which a= re not need to specifically state they are not preferably in an obvious way= . As part of this I consider it unconscionable that the statement that idea= l behind lojban is unambiguous communication. This was developed with a gre= at deal of thought and discussion by LLG (in some of which I participated).=

On the other hand gleki has contributed much time and effort to lojbanic ou= treach and other projects. This means that he should be supported in develo= ping his materials. They just need to be differentiated from official ones.= I also hope he continues to work within the Board understanding that Guska= nt's demands are meant, I think, only to correct some poor decisions on= his part.

karis

On February 27, 2016 3:02:07 AM EST, guskant <gusni.kantu@gmail.com> wrote:
>Introduction.
>
>Dear LLG members,
>
>This is an open letter of my simple demand.

_______________________________________________
Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@loj= ban.org
http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-membe= rs
--001a113671384c044e052cd742a1-- --===============1925388442066742755== 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 --===============1925388442066742755==--