From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Sun Jul 09 16:03:01 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-members); Sun, 09 Jul 2006 16:03:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1FziIl-0001C7-8M for llg-members@lojban.org; Sun, 09 Jul 2006 16:02:59 -0700 Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2006 16:02:59 -0700 To: llg-members@lojban.org Subject: [llg-members] Re: LLG 2006 Annual Meeting Thread Message-ID: <20060709230259.GA3440@chain.digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: llg-members@lojban.org References: <20060707224943.GB18983@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <44AFDF4A.7070009@lojban.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44AFDF4A.7070009@lojban.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060403 From: Robin Lee Powell X-archive-position: 210 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-members@lojban.org X-list: llg-members On Sat, Jul 08, 2006 at 12:37:30PM -0400, Bob LeChevalier wrote: > I offer the following as a friendly correction to the minutes, with > private email documentation sent to Robin in order to spare the list. > Comment of importance added at the end. > > Robin Lee Powell wrote: > >6) Removal of old members > > > > Members not participating in any form last year: > > > > Burgess, Gary > > Desquilbet, Jerome > > Hodges, John > > Le Du, Yann > > Lynch, Keith > > Nicholas, Nick > > O'Sullivan, Paul Francis > > Speer, Rob > > Shoulson, Mark > > Vilva, Veijo > > Weeks, Stephen (made a member during the meeting but not present > > for it, due to clerical error on my part) > > > > Whether we should *do* anything about any of these is a matter > > for discussion; while I believe I have valid e-mail addresses > > for all of them, I can't absolutely guarantee it. In > > particular, Stephen doesn't appear to have actually been on the > > list, which is my fault. > > > > I can not, in particular, guarantee that I have valid e-mail > > addresses for the following people, as they did not respond to a > > test mail: > > > > Dyke, Gregory > > Desquilbet, Jerome > > Hope, Charles > > Lynch, Keith > > Speer, Rob > > Keith Lynch was taken to have resigned last year before the meeting. Yeah, I was wondering about that. > Charles Hope aka xod and Gregory Dyke and Yann Le Du and Paul Francis > O'Sullivan all participated in the meeting last year. I seem to have somehow failed to crop the list appropriately to match the minutes. Agreed, and Yann Le Du added to the minutes. > Gary Burgess was mentioned in a minutes correction that suggested > a private email to Robin, and also responded to a message in the > leadup to the meeting. Yep, he was in the same place Yann was. Fixed. > Mark Shoulson made a brief appearance in the leadup to the meeting, > which I took to be an apology for inactivity. He has of course been > active, as recently as this week, on the Lojban List. Indeed; I was going to point this out when we got there. > ("not participating in any form last year" is ambiguous, and I am > sure that others mentioned participated during the last year in > the list and the wiki, but I didn't look). I was only talking about the LLG meeeting. > Conclusion and comment and request for ruling: > > I may have missed some of the others (I looked only in member-list > discussions that I saved), especially since some of those named > like xod use a Lojbanic name when posting and not their real name, > but this number of errors on who participated last year means that > we should be VERY careful about deciding to eliminate someone for > non-participation, and we probably should have a formal ruling > from the chair at some point as to what exactly will count for > "participation this year" when this inevitably comes up next year. The chair prefers to leave that open to discussion and debate on a per-member basis. > Given relatively short notice that an annual meeting is about to > start (people take vacations, and a meeting might end before they > know it started), and limited opportunities therefore to > participate by proxy, I would favor the loosest possible > definition of activity, and consider that a person's active > involvement in any public Lojbanic activity should buy at least a > year's grace on "participating in the meeting", and a special > email well in advance of a meeting to jog their memory if their > nonparticipation is likely to be raised as an issue. If people are participating in other forms, I expect the members to not dump them out of the LLG unless there seems to be a reason to do so. > Who is legally a member and who isn't is potentially a critical > issue if there were ever a formal (i.e. legal) dispute about some > matter, and while it seems very mundane needs to be attended to > more rigorously to prevent the potential problem, hence my request > for a formal ruling. It is the chair's ruling that each removal of a member requires an explicit vote of the membership (as it always has, although that vote, as with any others, can be by acclimation). As such, the chair expects the members voting to take into account the persons general level of activity in the community, as well as their explicit LLG participation. The chair feels no need to make a ruling on what kinds of participation "count"; that's a matter for pre-vote debate and the conscience of the members. It is my opinion, as Secretary/Treasurer and as member of the LLG but *NOT* as Chair of this meeting, that the LLG is a business organization, and that membership in the LLG and activity in the community should not be conflated; people should be in the LLG if the intend to show up and vote each year, nothing more and nothing less. We haven't had much to vote on the last year or two, which I agree makes the whole thing a bit fuzzy. I just think the two things should be seen seperately. -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/ Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!" Proud Supporter of the Singularity Institute - http://singinst.org/