From lojbab@lojban.org Thu Oct 30 13:37:19 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-members); Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:37:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eastrmmtao104.cox.net ([68.230.240.46]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KveGa-0003gk-7D for llg-members@lojban.org; Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:37:19 -0700 Received: from eastrmimpo01.cox.net ([68.1.16.119]) by eastrmmtao104.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.08.02.01 201-2186-121-102-20070209) with ESMTP id <20081030203705.QOSF2096.eastrmmtao104.cox.net@eastrmimpo01.cox.net> for ; Thu, 30 Oct 2008 16:37:05 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([70.187.235.94]) by eastrmimpo01.cox.net with bizsmtp id Z8d41a00A22sj6m028d4KW; Thu, 30 Oct 2008 16:37:05 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=HEp3WxBxXdUA:10 a=pLsZmdU2mTEA:10 a=3mVpWz0LPeLnexHpXc8A:9 a=LZ3xIt50I51nV-zlgcAA:7 a=zRASKYsD7HEqsslnJNJbc_aTFxIA:4 a=pt045V2O6wwA:10 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Message-ID: <490A1AEF.7030106@lojban.org> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 16:37:03 -0400 From: Bob LeChevalier User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: llg-members@lojban.org Subject: [llg-members] Re: LLG AGM 2008: New business: membership alert proposal References: <20081008210111.GX2447@nvg.org> <20081029183251.GW2447@nvg.org> <4908B49F.4080009@lojban.org> <20081029230222.GB1092@digitalkingdom.org> <4908F37A.2040504@lojban.org> <20081030193909.GG2447@nvg.org> In-Reply-To: <20081030193909.GG2447@nvg.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: 628 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: lojbab@lojban.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-members@lojban.org X-list: llg-members Arnt Richard Johansen wrote: > Correct me if I'm wrong: > > You're moving that: > * A statement like the above, plus the requirement that people be asked in advance, should hereafter be posted in every AGM agenda > * Proposed members should be added to the llg-members mailing list prior to the meeting on which they are proposed as members Yes. And I am not too picky about the wording, or about the formality of verifying the advance request - your statement in your membership nomination was quite sufficient for me. I am *not* moving that ONLY such membership nominations be allowed - that would probably require a bylaw amendment. Only that we adopt and state this as "normal policy". lojbab