Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of almikes@aol.com designates 205.188.108.134 as permitted sender) client-ip=205.188.108.134;
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 17:38:52 +0200
From: "'Wuzzy' via lojban" <lojban@googlegroups.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: [lojban] Lojban's leadership and how I don't give a shit about it
Message-ID: <20140515173852.477d9f55@aol.com>
In-Reply-To: <25B055499F67420FA34794323F9A95AB@gmail.com>
References: <25B055499F67420FA34794323F9A95AB@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam_score: -0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

The actual question to me is weather Lojban *needs* some kind of
leadership.

To give the leadership as you described to a single person also has=20

I disagree with the voting in itself and I think it=E2=80=99s nonsense.=20
It is completely meaningless to me. Even if selpa'i gets elected to
=E2=80=A6 well =E2=80=A6 the leader of Lojban xD =E2=80=A6 I won=E2=80=99t =
neccessarily recognize
his authority. Simply because nobody can tell me how to use any
language! :P
(But I try hard to stick to standards, so I can be understood.)
Accepting the voting process
in itself would mean I first recognize YOUR authority to cast out
a vote and to claim success or failure of that vote afterwards.
When do you think is the vote successful, anyways? Over 50%?
Over 66.666%? When does the vote even end? Which votes do even count?
Etc. etc. etc.
Hey, even I could start a vote today and get major support, but
that does not neccessarily mean the voting result is reasonable.
Any kind of democracy is based on a logical fallacy. Just because
many people are in favor of X, it does not mean X actually makes sense.

And before you ask, no, I also never recognized R.L.Powell as a leader.

Maybe selpa'i will flesh out some good proposals or improve existing
ones. Maybe I will support them or not. I don=E2=80=99t know, I haven=E2=80=
=99t looked
into many of them. Maybe I shoulod change that?
But no matter the proposals, I accept selpa'i as a Lojbanist, but
I don=E2=80=99t accept him as a leader.

I value proposals on how good they are, not solely on where they come
from. It is true that selpa'i has a long history in Lojban, but this
alone does not justify as him or anyone else being a leader.
In my eyes leadership is irrational. You suggest that way to go to
resolve dispute is to install a leader. But in reality, a leader
would be simply just another party, possibly arguing for another
position. But the leadership position is somehow accepted as =E2=80=9Cmore
valuable=E2=80=9D as the other positions. Sorry, but if you want to convinc=
e
ME that <INSERT PROPOSAL HERE> is good, you=E2=80=99d have to bring better
arguments than =E2=80=9C<INSERT LEADER HERE> said it!=E2=80=9D. This is the=
 reason
why I think it is irrational.
And even if that leader has a long commitment to a topic, that does not
necessarily mean that leader would continue that way. Humans make
mistakes, that=E2=80=99s normal. But if a leader makes a mistake, the impac=
t
is large.

--=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.