Received: from localhost ([::1]:52970 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1d33tc-0004bB-NS; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 10:05:00 -0700 Received: from mail-vk0-f47.google.com ([209.85.213.47]:33269) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1d33tY-0004aJ-MG for llg-members@lojban.org; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 10:04:58 -0700 Received: by mail-vk0-f47.google.com with SMTP id j127so58328676vkh.0 for ; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 10:04:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=jS4yEzFGAQ2Tt94R0/jP5AXGwwbMnF9yy8wZueuAdrc=; b=plvz+T7y3GwM/mhFS8bisHUhtfg7ugzIqMdgsNqQSqL89KOIs0Qsjgc/+itbZe8yvv 9u/EhgAOXzq81hoDrjVryuj2P55Gp4mU+RYnJMIiB0UOxVB+vxNv9xDUkHtkZLRjPlu3 3UgD10YF0b06sfiwZs/khHxnf4Fg+oDbdn+9dBRa0HTm9anVrOGZztRIQ3NKj9fTRJLn n3s7yh1Cj6TJH/9UZkGnkd5qBerrGvRH8Lk58rxHah2jzrlI3O3/W8+QMgCwvt4pVrC5 dA4FXZVHhcfN/5I8M0QwnfZE4OwfXFaqCDOTQfPdo6nBgQpNEAdg0aYZDCV5IMKKMfIZ VORg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=jS4yEzFGAQ2Tt94R0/jP5AXGwwbMnF9yy8wZueuAdrc=; b=cEp5WsKF2wgVBMwilqVpoF23hGOe2tTomyvIAB5OzEUf/T/jYoM/TqmwQWX+O7I0dh l3MoV3AxIMJtpKGOEGTF/Narl+Cegj4EQ/iyr8uQr5iS8UAevwbJ7piPXZ788ruWf43H eu5KuAeyLyCe2KqWkwg5zIYE/X3MXdMWrhZj4X3+/BOJTgIy/KcoYC39THFq3b6htMey BI32a9ygH8DeI0GlcOF2X/5a3moPucHWcbttPsxt8g2yxUfDJSEcKQ5KrxabMdZMpXn6 G7rKNjMYn2l3cXEIsh8j3j8iyYjsJ2l+e3vUYiC2WCdzyRfInCTcsE5jK0wCs/VRbbe/ fBVQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/4iivXPBEeT4UrZMhGx8V5CSZfYW43zxts2h/kahh+jFQfS6cce B1W0TRETig3qTiDvEzk4q1eHPJ4fZg== X-Received: by 10.31.174.4 with SMTP id x4mr637183vke.136.1493139890044; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 10:04:50 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.176.3.120 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 10:04:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.176.3.120 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 10:04:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <0457f7fe-dfd2-2ef6-9402-00d1dd15b239@lojban.org> <5966e78d-0e2f-bf8e-c019-1686671bb7d3@lojban.org> <78259B26-D0FF-406A-9700-6A3B14ADBF4E@gmail.com> From: Curtis Franks Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2017 13:04:49 -0400 Message-ID: To: llg-members@lojban.org X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.5 X-Spam_score_int: -14 X-Spam_bar: - Subject: Re: [Llg-members] Adjourn? was Re: Request for clarification X-BeenThere: llg-members@lojban.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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="===============9161522830353957805==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============9161522830353957805== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1143847cbf1987054e00b80f --001a1143847cbf1987054e00b80f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I vote in favor of adjournment and I agree with the suggestion concerning dates; if the latter needs a motion, then I so move. On Apr 25, 2017 12:15, "Gleki Arxokuna" wrote: > > > 2017-04-25 18:55 GMT+03:00 Karen Stein : > >> I move to adjourn the current meeting. >> > > I second (of others should reply) > > >> >> I also suggest that the 2017 meeting have June 1 as the date to have >> items for the agenda, and discussion start on June 2. >> > > fine. > > >> I picked these dates for two reasons: since Summer (Northern Hemisphere) >> is a time many take vacations and may have more time to participate, and >> also in order that the 2017 meeting end before the November-December >> holiday season. >> >> .karis. >> >> On April 25, 2017 7:38:27 AM EDT, Bob LeChevalier >> wrote: >>> >>> On 4/23/2017 7:16 PM, Bob LeChevalier wrote: >>> >>>> The short answer is that I don't know exactly what we are doing. Unless >>>> the members wish to decide now, it will be up to the Board, strongly >>>> affected by whoever is President and therefore running the meeting. >>>> >>>> While what I described was different from the above, I think I >>>> assimilated parts of it, to wit: >>>> >>>>> Riley originally proposed, >>>>> "I would strongly prefer that we adopt a format like the Language >>>>> Creation Society: We fix the agenda for the meeting beforehand, >>>>> >>>> .... >>>> gleki: >>>> >>>>> "conduct meetings in IRC PARTIALLY ... presenting transcripts >>>>> >>>> >>>> with the partial solution to the problem of non-inclusiveness to be that >>>> we conduct the discussion in IRC and on this mailing list IN ADVANCE OF >>>> THE MEETING, which is in keeping with having the agenda fixed in advance. >>>> >>>> The point being that people don't need to wait until the next meeting to >>>> discuss issues informally, thereby coming to a consensus motion that >>>> would need only a pro-forma vote during the meeting. >>>> >>>> At this point, I am easy to please, because we've had 2 years of what I >>>> consider to be near-total failures to hold a real meeting. A meeting >>>> that takes months, for which half of the people who are nominally >>>> present aren't paying enough attention to cast their Board vote within a >>>> week of the call for votes, can hardly be worse than any of the options >>>> referred to above. (I admit my own weakness of leadership as being >>>> partly at fault, but I didn't see any sign of people preferring >>>> something different to what I was and wasn't doing.) >>>> >>> >>> Assuming that Karen is satisfied with my clarification... >>> >>> we either need a motion addressing the question of how the meeting is to >>> be conducted >>> >>> or a motion to adjourn? >>> >>> If someone makes such a motion, then if there is no objection within 3 >>> days, the motion will be assumed to be approved. Or people can vote. >>> >>> lojbab >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> 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 >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Llg-members mailing list > Llg-members@lojban.org > http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members > > --001a1143847cbf1987054e00b80f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I vote in favor of adjournment and I agree with the sugge= stion concerning dates; if the latter needs a motion, then I so move.
=

On Apr 25, 2017 1= 2:15, "Gleki Arxokuna" <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote:
<= blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px= #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">


2017-04-25 18:55 GMT+03:00 Karen Stein <comcaresvcs@gmail.com>:
I move to adjourn the current meeting.
I second (of others should reply)
=C2=A0

I also suggest that the 2017 meeting have June 1 as the date to have items = for the agenda, and discussion start on June 2.

=
fine.
=C2=A0
= I picked these dates for two reasons: since Summer (Northern Hemisphere) i= s a time many take vacations and may have more time to participate, and als= o in order that the 2017 meeting end before the November-December holiday s= eason.

.karis.

On April 25, 2017 7:38:27 AM EDT,= Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
On 4/23/201=
7 7:16 PM, Bob LeChevalier wrote:
 The short answer is that I don't know exactly what we are doing.  U=
nless
 the members wish to decide now, it will be up to the Board, stron=
gly
 affected by whoever is President and therefore running the meeting.=


 While what I described was  different from the above, I think I assimilated parts of it, to wit:
 Riley originally proposed,
 "I would strongly prefer that we a=
dopt a format like the Language
 Creation Society: We fix the agenda for=
 the meeting beforehand,
 ....
 gleki:
 "conduct meetings in IRC PARTIALLY ... pre=
senting transcripts

 with the partial solution to the p=
roblem of non-inclusiveness to be that
 we conduct the discussion in IRC=
 and on this mailing list IN ADVANCE OF
 THE MEETING, which is in keepin=
g with having the agenda fixed in advance.

 The point being that peo=
ple don't need to wait until the next meeting to
 discuss issues inf=
ormally, thereby coming to a consensus motion that
 would need only a pr=
o-forma vote during the meeting.

 At this point, I am easy to please=
, because we've had 2 years of what I
 consider to be near-total fai=
lures to hold a real meeting.  A meeting
 that takes months, for which h=
alf of the people who are nominally
 present aren't paying enough at=
tention to cast their Board vote within a
 week of the call for votes, c=
an hardly be worse than any of the options
 referred to above. (I admit =
my own weakness of leadership as being
 partly at fault, but I didn'=
t see any sign of people preferring
 something different to what I was a=
nd wasn't doing.)

Assuming that Karen is satisfied =
with my clarification...

we either need a motion addressing the ques=
tion of how the meeting is to 
be conducted

or a motion to adjour=
n?

If someone makes such a motion, then if there is no objection wit=
hin 3 
days, the motion will be assumed to be approved.  Or people can v=
ote.

lojbab



Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@lojban.org=

http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members=

_______________________________= ________________
Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@loj= ban.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

--001a1143847cbf1987054e00b80f-- --===============9161522830353957805== 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 --===============9161522830353957805==--