From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Wed Oct 29 16:02:22 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-members); Wed, 29 Oct 2008 16:02:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KvK3S-0003MM-4m for llg-members@lojban.org; Wed, 29 Oct 2008 16:02:22 -0700 Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 16:02:22 -0700 From: Robin Lee Powell To: llg-members@lojban.org Subject: [llg-members] Re: LLG AGM 2008: New business: membership alert proposal Message-ID: <20081029230222.GB1092@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: llg-members@lojban.org References: <20081008210111.GX2447@nvg.org> <20081029183251.GW2447@nvg.org> <4908B49F.4080009@lojban.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4908B49F.4080009@lojban.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-archive-position: 610 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 Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 03:08:15PM -0400, Bob LeChevalier wrote: > Arnt Richard Johansen wrote: >>> 6. Election of New Members >> >> >> If you would like to nominate someone to be a member of the LLG, >> please do so now. >> >> To avoid confusion, I would like to repeat Robin's statement from >> last year: >> >>> Please recall that the LLG is a business organization, and is >>> only tangentially in the business of running the Lojban >>> language. The BPFK is in charge of the actual Lojban parts, and >>> you need not be a member of the LLG to contribute to the BPFK. > > > If it is in order, I move that it be the normal practice NOT to > propose or accept for membership any person who has not been > asked *in advance of the meeting*, with the exception of someone > who is actively participating in some organizational capacity of > LLG (organizational being defined in contrast to the "actual > language parts" as per the statement above). I would like a > statement to this effect added to the agenda/announcement > corresponding to Arnt's message above in all future years. That's definately new business; I've renamed the subject. Can you be a lot more specific about what you're asking the organization to do? I'm not following. -Robin -- They say: "The first AIs will be built by the military as weapons." And I'm thinking: "Does it even occur to you to try for something other than the default outcome?" -- http://shorl.com/tydruhedufogre http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/