Received: from mail-gh0-f190.google.com ([209.85.160.190]:52004) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1TpkWB-0004IP-31; Mon, 31 Dec 2012 10:55:33 -0800 Received: by mail-gh0-f190.google.com with SMTP id 3sf6383850ghz.27 for ; Mon, 31 Dec 2012 10:55:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=x-received:x-beenthere:x-received:x-received:received-spf :x-ct-class:x-ct-score:x-ct-refid:x-ct-spam:x-authority-analysis :x-cm-score:message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent :mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=yHIxPdo3oh0M/rG0cyUEW4uyAvqlWV6Ofj9OAg9WajY=; b=WLLpGLk8BuMjUhDYuTfkBbB2vfuMzaNAr4HAFc39n0X1VakwmWSPmAzlbE/NFz98jB n/1t3QqQ/lnevfVVIVbeLvpF8PEYZutQCexvUEoNNtQqWuW2zxDMGlpX9vNiABBDp3ko 3hSsdEVYTDp7sxd0riT2gK1pANrL9XncWp64u/XiJ/tJXNXw0VAQnCnNuponIf9CS7zf I37Puq6zmEO32zKEzZApQ4caJM3Agaf+zyLiRpbDGO0Dp0QknKDa59wqQ0cXk0336w6G a6VLGfpjHio5RmJUnMRH8YnBLJ5EYGxjEe4uPdJ9zsZRJDaNAwRq4R/Lw8v6DT1S7x7y K2Pg== X-Received: by 10.49.116.1 with SMTP id js1mr6239833qeb.19.1356980116514; Mon, 31 Dec 2012 10:55:16 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.49.121.97 with SMTP id lj1ls2285707qeb.39.gmail; Mon, 31 Dec 2012 10:55:16 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.58.155.202 with SMTP id vy10mr20592921veb.22.1356980116063; Mon, 31 Dec 2012 10:55:16 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.58.155.202 with SMTP id vy10mr20592918veb.22.1356980116053; Mon, 31 Dec 2012 10:55:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from eastrmfepo201.cox.net (eastrmfepo201.cox.net. [68.230.241.216]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id q13si12921706vdh.0.2012.12.31.10.55.15; Mon, 31 Dec 2012 10:55:16 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 68.230.241.216 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) client-ip=68.230.241.216; Received: from eastrmimpo109 ([68.230.241.222]) by eastrmfepo201.cox.net (InterMail vM.8.01.04.00 201-2260-137-20101110) with ESMTP id <20121231185515.OJDJ17456.eastrmfepo201.cox.net@eastrmimpo109> for ; Mon, 31 Dec 2012 13:55:15 -0500 Received: from [192.168.0.100] ([98.169.148.216]) by eastrmimpo109 with cox id iJvF1k0044gNKFm01JvFlB; Mon, 31 Dec 2012 13:55:15 -0500 X-CT-Class: Clean X-CT-Score: 0.00 X-CT-RefID: str=0001.0A020201.50E1DF93.00C7,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0 X-CT-Spam: 0 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=ac/jbGUt c=1 sm=1 a=oMUrf2L0cPa+6Alu0knKiQ==:17 a=YsUzL_8ObRgA:10 a=IPHh7_3Ra0sA:10 a=xmHE3fpoGJwA:10 a=8nJEP1OIZ-IA:10 a=8YJikuA2AAAA:8 a=aB2t1-zLDNoA:10 a=yUu2pSMACzyxoq8s-4EA:9 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=dxBpO5_FDU0A:10 a=oMUrf2L0cPa+6Alu0knKiQ==:117 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Message-ID: <50E1DF93.1070903@lojban.org> Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2012 13:55:15 -0500 From: "Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG" Organization: The Logical Language Group, Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] CLL 1.1/ CLL 2.0. What is your opinion in the current situation? References: <20121228185329.GO18038@stodi.digitalkingdom.org> <20121228215107.GR7855@samsa.fritz.box> <50DEF2D2.6080309@lojban.org> <50E04A0F.8080408@lojban.org> <80850efe-706f-4afe-8788-77fd6daa6b59@googlegroups.com> <50E05EB8.5040104@lojban.org> <20121231120400.GB32434@samsa.fritz.box> In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 68.230.241.216 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) smtp.mail=lojbab@lojban.org Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / Jonathan Jones wrote: > Those are all good questions, and my answers are, in order: I don't even > know if we're bothering with the voting part or just implicitly > accepting them as voted approved when they're made blue; yes, it's part > of the wiki, you just have to add the poll to a page if you want voting > on something in it; I don't know if there is a such thing as "official > leave", but I'm pretty sure voting is a simple majority and we don't all > have to vote at the same time, just whenever we get around to going to > the poll and choosing our response, so it could take as much as a month > to get all the votes depending on personal time constraints; not at all, no. Actually, such votes are by consensus - we made it consensus minus 1 to allow for bypassing a lone holdout. But a "no" vote requires an explanation. From the obsolete procedures page. > Votes on non-administrative issues are consensus minus 1. > Votes on administrative issues are 2/3 majority. A vote on an > administrative issue may be called at any time by any member, and > everyone, including the jatna, is bound by them. The jatna strongly > prefers that you take any problems up with him first, however. lojbab -- Bob LeChevalier lojbab@lojban.org www.lojban.org President and Founder, The Logical Language Group, Inc. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.