From lojbab@lojban.org Mon Sep 20 15:29:40 2010 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-members); Mon, 20 Sep 2010 15:29:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eastrmmtao104.cox.net ([68.230.240.46]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Oxorh-0003rC-7n for llg-members@lojban.org; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 15:29:40 -0700 Received: from eastrmimpo02.cox.net ([68.1.16.120]) by eastrmmtao104.cox.net (InterMail vM.8.00.01.00 201-2244-105-20090324) with ESMTP id <20100920222931.DUXC16482.eastrmmtao104.cox.net@eastrmimpo02.cox.net> for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 18:29:31 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.100] ([70.179.118.163]) by eastrmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id 9AVW1f00M3Xcbvq02AVWNZ; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 18:29:30 -0400 X-VR-Score: -100.00 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=Cpsp9XuSY13Uni36OgXCsheP7uKp19gQdVzN1WEXNos= c=1 sm=1 a=bgiPEJ_n5i4A:10 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=7ls7RdmwX4RvLZNVULbZcg==:17 a=8YJikuA2AAAA:8 a=QMdhjiMdcnsSPvGa6MwA:9 a=8FGpBrwAPV8woCw2IckA:7 a=oMz_Kv81N-V45eT1ScE7Uf1fV8gA:4 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=dxBpO5_FDU0A:10 a=Ah29Am5iu38rOcLj:21 a=IIRdUjrnLLg6iLZv:21 a=7ls7RdmwX4RvLZNVULbZcg==:117 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Authentication-Results: cox.net; none Message-ID: <4C97E04A.4030007@lojban.org> Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 18:29:30 -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: 2010 Annual Meeting - Old Business References: <4C8C2009.7060606@lojban.org> <4C8F787E.9000101@lojban.org> In-Reply-To: <4C8F787E.9000101@lojban.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam_score: 0.8 X-Spam_score_int: 8 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "chain.digitalkingdom.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Bob LeChevalier wrote: >> Pierre briefly spoke up during reports and said that he was working on >> something, but I am lacking context to really understand what he was >> saying and where things stand. >> >> Bottom line for meeting purposes - >> Are we still interested in this as an organization? >> What are the objectives? >> What is the priority and/or desired timeline to achieve those objectives? >> Is anyone willing to assume leadership, and ideally to keep the rest >> of us informed? >> Other questions can be added to this list. >> >> Let's have a little discussion before any motions (if any are needed). > > There has been absolX-archive-position: 949 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 Bob LeChevalier wrote: >> Pierre briefly spoke up during reports and said that he was working on >> something, but I am lacking context to really understand what he was >> saying and where things stand. >> >> Bottom line for meeting purposes - >> Are we still interested in this as an organization? >> What are the objectives? >> What is the priority and/or desired timeline to achieve those objectives? >> Is anyone willing to assume leadership, and ideally to keep the rest >> of us informed? >> Other questions can be added to this list. >> >> Let's have a little discussion before any motions (if any are needed). > > There has been absolute silence. Perhaps this is because of active > discussions on other lists. Or is it that no one is interested in > Lojban Certification any longer? > > Or is nobody paying attention? There's been a little talk now on the subject, but I don't sense that there is any interest among the membership in taking any action. I will ask that Pierre, or some other person make a note to themselves to report to the membership sometime in the next few months, hopefully to report some progress. > New Old Business topic (but the Lojban certification topic is still open). > > What would members think about returning to the IRC-based annual > meetings we had for a few years, for future meetings? IRC sessions were > intense and sometimes long, often inconvenient in time for some people > outside the US, but there was a lot more active participation, and a > sense that the members were in charge of the organization. It also > allowed non-voting-members of the community to freely participate > without playing with mailing list membership, which I think is a good > thing. It seems clear that my feelings on this are not shared. No motion has been presented. There has been a suggestion that we try to put out an advance agenda. I can try to push this for next year. And I may try a little harder to have a real pre-meeting IRC session (which I intended to have this year) to discuss the agenda. (Bear in mind that I may not be President next year; the Board has not yet met to elect officers, so this isn't a commitment.) ni'o New Old Business topic: byfy What (if anything) can we do (or should we do) as an organization to help this effort move along? Specific item: Lindar has offered to work intensely on byfy for a period of time in return for several hundred dollars to cover his rent for a month. Do we want to start paying people to do Lojban work, especially work that other Lojbanists are (intermittently) working on, and not getting paid to do? Neither Robin nor I knows the possible ramifications of "hiring" Lindar - whether we would have to treat him as an employee and do withholding and social security, and other legal stuff. If anyone knows someone with relevant expertise that they could ask, it would be much appreciated. -- Bob LeChevalier lojbab@lojban.org www.lojban.org President and Founder, The Logical Language Group, Inc.