From matt.mattarn@gmail.com Thu Dec 01 23:35:29 2005 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-members); Thu, 01 Dec 2005 23:35:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.206]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1Ei5S1-0003gL-J7 for llg-members@lojban.org; Thu, 01 Dec 2005 23:35:27 -0800 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i21so9157wra for ; Thu, 01 Dec 2005 23:35:24 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=f+u1siHCZh3qSebdbobPEhabdq7+/z/S/q99UpaIpVZ8BERdtRULlXaDtzlpQDAH4+rTjpVhJQw6GMaa+HdEDvEjaEALZEmsxhHIspeeQf21RFrxpmlSli4tSGbuHTKeOaFzzXRijz4VqKAf3MBz12SR/kDcDzeDBjnmdaeQ7y4= Received: by 10.65.81.20 with SMTP id i20mr1146647qbl; Thu, 01 Dec 2005 12:55:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.65.110.8 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Dec 2005 12:55:09 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 15:55:09 -0500 From: Matt Arnold To: llg-members@lojban.org Subject: [llg-members] Re: 2005 LLG Annual Meeting Thread In-Reply-To: <20051201202224.GU18294@chain.digitalkingdom.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis Content-Disposition: inline References: <20051115212824.GM8740@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <20051126011734.GX20158@miranda.org> <20051128062658.GA2289@miranda.org> <20051128081254.GM16858@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <20051201040334.GF18294@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <20051201200613.GR18294@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <20051201202224.GU18294@chain.digitalkingdom.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) X-archive-position: 123 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: matt.mattarn@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-members@lojban.org X-list: llg-members On 12/1/05, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > You said earlier, > Actually, I said nothing of the kind, that was someone else. I meant "you" plural. Whatever. This is a tangent. > Umm, sure, but what does this have to do with the BPFK, which was > what my original post was about? I have no idea, and I don't care whether it has anything to do with that. You seem to be bringing in an additional thing, this "BPFK", somehow distinct from the boards and stockholders and memberships and incorporations and committees. This is only confusing me more. But I'm not asking you to explain it. Just stop the hairsplitting and irrelevant procecural tangents whenever I comment, please. The only reason I posted today was to say that I don't need to know. -epkat