Received: from localhost ([::1]:52420 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ec1Qe-0001Ak-Mb; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 20:03:52 -0800 Received: from mail-ua0-f175.google.com ([209.85.217.175]:33720) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ec1Q8-00019M-Vg for llg-members@lojban.org; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 20:03:22 -0800 Received: by mail-ua0-f175.google.com with SMTP id z47so14727341uac.0 for ; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 20:03:20 -0800 (PST) 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=EW3N0wT8b7a2Ql+4mhnefzD6wVil1xHLjWPdPk3JM/4=; b=g09RYUgtuvqyVRTm/7XEa1Ga3uXPscqoss9V68tF1FHfYFWVb1A8O0oXUjDWK5QJWv kqzKDarSEKBDjzHCdiFZpdkHbRMsT2TT5rpL+bGtF17e8bgSyLwZGQcTs7FuzfjfoxxG FvlC/QlQ5E4U268kcqyItSf5w3e7eraeOBDEExxMXNB5WcI0824rAFZ8zLgulY4dXiNG zo14Fvv3265GW1dAWuRDBKmHERDeAf9utDiHKhVGIKSA4YtsGEBVJt7M5Tj9mxPNzm7o eZonC2E4gURInov1u9yH12QeG596CsVjeNXR46k9ej/40dXSEvi0eJ5+oSbYp4HDXm0b x8Ew== 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=EW3N0wT8b7a2Ql+4mhnefzD6wVil1xHLjWPdPk3JM/4=; b=B93RWfzneCPtl7333/7aT5tlqM7b4sWe/zrYQYpfbbVaziuYi4atS7Lb0jpepaGcUb U63+u9wAPigEQsqOmhpOBKneWoLgL7DNcUxyStfFWDEQoCNbFwgwB+Wb5I3dPDgNQwL5 SUtXoHjFrfNCl4PL+A+uQ9QOeRIQHdb2gACmvuJndKPKlwzvLvJaHKEQFQGoP1jb9k+2 ktQ5ziQGyBtN1w3zjgEzFydBOON29cnBK273Qf48xYb6d5IKij/nGJUIULrd+Ep2BlaD r89Gbju6Ic1JCWlQNcvWyXhNQuM3pluaY6J2QuUOp5TgBdDY2V8F3P9IA/1w/EnHrddH JoeA== X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxytcWod1HTiUR9eqSqQS2EKwELUojy9LZs+QKBLBfLJ7wq3Asw0/H 87l6V4D0KtTUd8SyGrjDdhkdcGHRTairDi8qhgw9UA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBotqqp10XqUAdQxBOwSE5iYKYQy8aOlt5rhzHOpjJORJUvvyA41srb7OVgJ8rBU5TQhSRGFTf0kQNFntqk/iRs8= X-Received: by 10.176.78.28 with SMTP id g28mr3941622uah.148.1516248194029; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 20:03:14 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.176.79.21 with HTTP; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 20:02:53 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Alex Burka Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 23:02:53 -0500 Message-ID: To: llg-members@lojban.org X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_bar: - Subject: Re: [Llg-members] Summary of Votes 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="===============7182317639706972908==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============7182317639706972908== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403043c691cff1d220563050a5d" --f403043c691cff1d220563050a5d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" As far as I can tell, the following motions are currently being voted on: - "Proposal 4 - Search Online" http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/private/llg-members/2018-January/001891.html - "Proposal 6 for a Body to Investigate Officialness of Other Sites, Etc." http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/private/llg-members/2018-January/001871.html The other motions (including the amended version of Proposal 6) are not collecting votes yet, despite Curtis and others having entered several votes. Is this right? - durka On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Creative Care Services < comcaresvcs@gmail.com> wrote: > I apologize for the meeting becoming so hard to follow. I was so excited > to finally be getting participation that I didn't rein it in sufficiently. > Other thanI am posting the text of each motion separately when opening them > for a vote with "Vote" in the subject, so a search ought to turn them up. > As each proposal was officially announced for discussion its header > included the word "Proposal". See if that helps, and leave a note here if > you still have trouble. > > .karis. > > On Jan 17, 2018 02:29, "Gleki Arxokuna" > wrote: > >> Thanks for the summary but I think full text of each motion without >> references to other motions is necessary. >> >> 2018-01-17 10:25 GMT+03:00 Curtis Franks : >> >>> I can summarize them for now because I was intending to go to sleep soon >>> and it would take a decent amount of work to collect them. If someone else >>> wants to do it, then I would not be upset ( :P ). >>> >>> Motion #1: Adopt the policy that the LLG shall advocate for and support >>> loglangs. It exactly defines "loglang" for the purposes of this motion and >>> the subsequent two separate motions. >>> >>> Motion #1 amended-version: Same as Motion #1 proper, except the >>> definition (really, a description) of "loglang" is broader and left vague; >>> the precious criterion is sufficient here but would not necessarily be >>> necessary. This description would propagate to the next two separate >>> motions as well. >>> >>> Motion #2: Adopt the policy that the LLG shall advocate for and support >>> Lojban, regardless of its categorization as a loglang according to any >>> given definition (particularly that of either version of Motion #1). >>> Presumably, we would have to find some consensus on which Lojban is meant. >>> >>> Motion #3: Adopt the policy that the LLG shall advocate for and support >>> the development of some loglang which is derived from Lojban, where >>> "loglang" would align with the adopted version of Motion #1. >>> >>> Motion #4: Adopt a policy in which the LLG will search for so-called >>> 'official-seeming' accounts and request that the disclaim their lack of >>> affiliation with the LLG and of support/grant of officialness therefrom. >>> Exactly who would oversee this effort was not addressed. >>> >>> Motion #5: Adopt a policy in which unofficial content on *.lojban.org >>> will be disclaimed as such. Exactly who would oversee this effort was not >>> addressed. >>> >>> Motion #6: Sets up a separate body in order to implement Motion #4 or >>> Motion #5 (rather than leaving those policies toothless or leaving them to >>> the LLG to directly oversee). The wording was a bit problematic in regard >>> to which of those two motions would be covered by the body, but the >>> intention was to only implement those policies which are adopted, if any. >>> >>> Motion #6 Amended 1ce: Same thing as Motion #6 proper in spirit, but >>> with the aforementioned wording problem fixed, >>> improved presentation/organization, and some protections put in place >>> in order address fears and concerns which had been raised. >>> >>> The last motion which I mentioned is self-explanatory in my original >>> description. >>> >>> >>> On Jan 17, 2018 00:34, "Thomas Porter" >> l.com> wrote: >>> >>> >I'm totally lost. Can you post links to each of your motions? >>> >>> I, too, would like a link to all the current motions. Most of them got >>> tossed into my spam folder and they seem to be in a very disorganized >>> fashion. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Llg-members mailing list > Llg-members@lojban.org > http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members > > --f403043c691cff1d220563050a5d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
As far as I can tell, the following motions are currently = being voted on:

- "Proposal 6 for a Body to Investig= ate Officialness of Other Sites, Etc."=C2=A0http://mail.l= ojban.org/mailman/private/llg-members/2018-January/001871.html

The other motions (including the amended version of Propos= al 6) are not collecting votes yet, despite Curtis and others having entere= d several votes. Is this right?

- durka

On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 a= t 2:15 PM, Creative Care Services <comcaresvcs@gmail.com> wrote:
I apologize for the meeting becoming so hard to follow. I was so excit= ed to finally be getting participation that I didn't rein it in suffici= ently. Other thanI am posting the text of each motion separately when openi= ng them for a vote with "Vote" in the subject, so a search ought = to turn them up. As each proposal was officially announced for discussion i= ts header included the word "Proposal". See if that helps, and le= ave a note here if you still have trouble.

.karis.=C2=A0

On= Jan 17, 2018 02:29, "Gleki Arxokuna" <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>= wrote:
Thanks for the summary but I think full text of eac= h motion without references to other motions is necessary.

2018-01-17 10:25 GMT+03:00 = Curtis Franks <curtis.w.franks@gmail.com>:
I can summari= ze them for now because I was intending to go to sleep soon and it would ta= ke a decent amount of work to collect them. If someone else wants to do it,= then I would not be upset ( :P ).

Motion #1: Adopt the policy that the LLG shall advocate for and suppor= t loglangs. It exactly defines "loglang" for the purposes of this= motion and the subsequent two separate motions.
Motion #1 amended-version: Same as Motion #1 prope= r, except the definition (really, a description) of "loglang" is = broader and left vague; the precious criterion is sufficient here but would= not necessarily be necessary. This description would propagate to the next= two separate motions as well.

Motion #2:=C2=A0Adopt the pol= icy that the LLG shall advocate for and support Lojban, regardless of its c= ategorization as a loglang according to any given definition (particularly = that of either version of Motion #1). Presumably, we would have to find som= e consensus on which Lojban is meant.

Motion #3:=C2=A0Adopt the policy that the LLG shall advocate for and supp= ort the development of some loglang which is derived from Lojban, where &qu= ot;loglang" would align with the adopted version of Motion #1.<= /div>

Motion #4: Adopt a policy i= n which the LLG will search for so-called 'official-seeming' accoun= ts and request that the disclaim their lack of affiliation=C2=A0with the LL= G and of support/grant of officialness therefrom. Exactly who would oversee= this effort was not addressed.

M= otion #5: Adopt a policy in which unofficial content on *.lojban.org will be disclaimed as such. E= xactly who would oversee this effort was not addressed.

Motion #6: Sets up a separate body in order to imple= ment Motion #4 or Motion #5 (rather than leaving those policies toothless o= r leaving them to the LLG to directly oversee). The wording was a bit probl= ematic in regard to which of those two motions would be covered by the body= , but the intention was to only implement those policies which are adopted,= if any.

Motion #6 Amended 1ce: S= ame thing as Motion #6 proper in spirit, but with the aforementioned=C2=A0w= ording problem fixed, improved=C2=A0presentation/organization, and som= e protections put in place in order address fears and concerns which had be= en raised.

The last motion which = I mentioned is self-explanatory in my original description.

On Jan 17, 2018 00:34, "Thomas Porter" <osiris_hades_deathland= @hotmail.com> wrote:

>I'm totally lost. Can= you post links to each of your motions?


I, too, would like a link to all the current motions. Most of them got= tossed into my spam folder and they seem to be in a very disorganized fash= ion.

_______________________________________________
Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@loj= ban.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@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


--f403043c691cff1d220563050a5d-- --===============7182317639706972908== 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 --===============7182317639706972908==--