From and.rosta@gmail.com Thu Oct 11 18:23:04 2007 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-members); Thu, 11 Oct 2007 18:23:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.175]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1Ig9F0-00082M-Pq for llg-members@lojban.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 18:23:04 -0700 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id m2so571129uge for ; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 18:23:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XbmdjT6UN3FvEx4ruM/2kFvMlnMBlCsWgPF7sd4bI+8=; b=sQSHKoGYGnGZE7v7Pnqgz9l/9Ll7slhtOteHjIxBXWaHNbJiDI/qh4B9atZnnlk/DjUZ6Xp1Yakdb7GSoEL4NErRYlwRC+MgxVoXNTCpNEVcj9PSzU7BDzRfKbDrxv1zh+GTBiZo+omXTFdiE9k09/BtbgFeognWXQhILLGRHrc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=U0ZFN5hVz1FMykYXLTtFfNtgaaF3ByPMUN2GyCyv6+cv4fokqqZDJbSRw0IoXWGKwmxTJGKCxemjXDhLnCa8zDyFhBs0kh8OoE/qscXa0l3s2p2rDDMo4xsBtXuw7KqJMcgNK637rtl+u4XvB7+nn5riLDiz+InSxaf+LrPUmOc= Received: by 10.66.255.7 with SMTP id c7mr3779480ugi.1192152180647; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 18:23:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.1.68? ( [87.194.76.9]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id o30sm251505ugd.2007.10.11.18.22.59 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 11 Oct 2007 18:22:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <470ECC71.1080906@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 02:22:57 +0100 From: And Rosta User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: llg-members@lojban.org Subject: [llg-members] Re: LLG AGM 2007: New Business References: <20070918181955.GW10667@nvg.org> <20071010000942.GZ10376@digitalkingdom.org> <20071011190654.GO13890@digitalkingdom.org> <470E9480.3000307@lojban.org> <470EC2F2.6070006@lojban.org> <20071012005503.GD13890@digitalkingdom.org> In-Reply-To: <20071012005503.GD13890@digitalkingdom.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 387 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: and.rosta@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-members@lojban.org X-list: llg-members I of course think that xorlo is a vast improvement on CLL and that it is madness for the whole bpfk enterprise to have to wait until every last t is crossed and i dotted and nook and cranny of never-used minutiae scrutinized. On the other hand, though, I haven't been active in Lojban for some years. (I decided to remain a member of LLG (unless asked to stand down) in case I can at some point be of use to it.) So I'm not very comfortable about me voting on what is to be official Lojban. Ideally what I'd like to do is vote not for xorlo as such but rather to empower active bpfkers to make the decision on xorlo becoming official -- and to make the decision at the time when they think it needs to be made. (Doubtless there are all sorts of legalistic niceties escaping my notice here, I acknowledge.) --And.