Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c00::22f as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c00::22f;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <53F893AE.8030901@lojban.org>
References: <fef8c82f-c3b3-4f99-925b-9b940d0c5913@googlegroups.com>
	<53F79061.5000706@lojban.org>
	<53F7D98A.5020101@lojban.org>
	<53F893AE.8030901@lojban.org>
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2014 17:39:58 +0400
Message-ID: <CAO7bV+gDXFatP_6Rr=k4=kPfN1cMoEWdQqsfepA1RWhBPhDGmQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Revitalizing LLG: Suggestions for the 2014 annual meeting
From: Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bae46a8fe42e505014c1657

--047d7bae46a8fe42e505014c1657
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

2014-08-23 17:14 GMT+04:00 Robert LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org>:

> On 8/23/2014 12:33 AM, Gleki Arxokuna wrote:
>
>>     Probably.  I'm not sure that I could do it, and actually be able to
>>     communicate.
>>
>> There are enough speakers in IRC who can at least produce Lojban
>> sentences if not in real time but at least with the help of a dictionary.
>>
>
> But the suggestion specified meetings by email, not on IRC.


Bob, I only mean that Lojban nowadays is not a project but a fully blown
USABLE and USED language. There are fluent speakers.
There are enough people who talk to each other in Lojban and understad each
other.

That's why allowing people who can produce correct sentences in Lojban
should be forbidden.
Speaking Lojban only is not a problem for a lot of people.
Then why are we still talking about Lojban not in Lojban?
I suggest that you allow fluent speakers + those who can produce correct
discourses in written form like in email lists.

Look how many of them: http://www.lojban.org/resources/irclog/lojban/
The IRC chat is active.

From this thread I can confirm that selpa'i is a fluent speaker, even la
mukti (ba'anairu'e) can produce fine sentences.

We are not discussing issues or reforming Lojban (I'm completely on
rlpowell's side in this matter).

If a person can speak fluent Lojban why disallow him/her from BPFK and LLG?


I don't even think of IRC most of the time, even when I have dead time, and
> certainly not when I am actively running a meeting.  (And this presumes
> that one of those speakers on IRC is actually there when someone has a
> question; my experience has been something like a 50% rate of even getting
> a single response when I get on IRC, and usually that is merely a
> greeting.  Only once in many years have I found a conversation going on at
> all, and it was in English.


I remember you logged in only once during the last 6 months or so. .uinai
at that time  was sleeping. However, this link shows that IRC covers the
most important part of Lojbanic activity.
http://www.lojban.org/resources/irclog/lojban/


>
>  You response surprises me.
>> Non-Lojbanists might conclude that Lojban is not even a working language.
>>
>
> Any conclusion about Lojban reached based on the voting membership, many
> of whom date from when Lojban was NOT a working language, would be bound to
> be erroneous.  Then bear in mind that the primary focus of the membership
> is on organizational matters rather than Lojban matters.
>

Well, as for financial issues sure, LLG members might know nothing about
Lojban.
But in general this situation is silly. What are we here for if not to
learn Lojban and produce texts in it?


> One might question the fact that almost all discussions of byfy matters
> has been in English rather than in Lojban (even when conducted by people
> who have demonstrated the ability to write voluminously in Lojban).  But of
> course if they were in Lojban, there would be zero chance that I would read
> them, for example.


When Lojban was being developed people need to somehow explain that "This
construct is translated into English as..., use it in these situations: ..."

At that time English was a platform to build Lojban.

However, nowadays Lojban is mostly complete and there is no need in English.

  I could do so, but it hasn't been my priority given the lack of time I
> have been spending in recent years.  I could wish it were otherwise, but it
> isn't.


Well, of course. But do you wish other people continue the great work
you've done in past? If so the number of written stuff in Lojban should
increase over time.

More and more people should become fluent speakers. Nobody forbids you to
use English or any other languages of course.
It just appears that English is used to the detriment of Lojban these days.

>
>
>  However, is it culturally neutral to continue using non-Lojban for that?
>>
>
> No, but the purpose of LLG meetings is to get LLG business done (and do so
> as quickly as possible, since business matters aren't the highest
> lojban-related priority for much of anyone in the community except possibly
> me), not demonstrate cultural neutrality.
>

What business? If selling books then of course (Lojbanistan is
non-existent, neither The Bank of Lojban).

But the bylaws, LLG minutes were written in English which is completely
crazy.


>      We aren't getting a set of meeting minutes in English.  Do you think
>>     Robin will be able to more easily produce them in Lojban?  And he is
>>     presumably as fluent a Lojbanist as we have.
>>
>> I didn't know he couldn't. I thought only a lack of his time could
>> prevent him from doing so.
>>
>
> Lack of time is precisely the reason.  And for most of us, dealing with
> Lojban text (either writing it or reading it) takes a lot more time than
> dealing with English.


Well, you are not going to rename this community into {ju'i glipli}, do
you? ;)


>
>  But even then assign other people for that. E.g. I can do initial
>> translation and you can check them afterwards (since not I will be
>> signing them anyway).
>>
>
> No one produces minutes in English, so you have nothing to translate.
>
> And I personally wouldn't likely have the time to check and substantial
> amount of text written in Lojban for validity, much less correctness of
> translation.
>
> But the people who originally proposed doing meetings in Lojban 10+ years
> ago. never even produced a set of Lojban bylaws, which would undoubtedly be
> the first required official document.
>
> Indeed I just checked and the whole effort to do meetings in Lojban
> appears to have been approved in 2002 but was removed and/or tabled
> indefinitely in 2003.  The one remaining motion approved in 2002 and never
> superseded, was that official stuff on the web be translated into Lojban.
> So far as I know, absolutely nothing was ever done on this by the people
> advocating it.
>

Why not start from the beginning? Now we do have people who can not only
translate existing bylaws but to produce new ones from scratch?

I want the community to go forward. Shall we continue making no headway?

>
>      We would have to start by having a translation of the Bylaws into
>>     Lojban (and agreeing on that translation).  I would then suggest
>>     translating whichever book of parliamentary procedure that John
>>     Cowan specifies into Lojban.  Otherwise we lack the terminology for
>>     a parliamentary meeting.
>>
>> Terminology can be made on the flow during translations with adding them
>> to jbovlaste.
>>
>
> They can be, but they aren't.  And it has been noted that there are active
> people nowadays who don't know how to add to jbovlaste even though there
> are instructions.


All of the active speakers I know of know how to add words to jbovlaste.
So for them this is not a problem.

(I don't claim to be active in this sense, and I also do not know how
> because I haven't bothered to figure it out, never having wanted to add a
> word.)
>
> Remember, BTW, that jbovlaste is an official project, but its contents are
> not automatically "official" merely by being added.  We'd need some sort of
> formally published dictionary, approved by byfy and/or LLG (depending on
> the conditions specified in the 2002 statement).
>

Great.  Why not start discussing the new dictionary (discussing in Lojban
ofc.)?


> There is an official project to come up with Lojban parliamentary terms,
> but the one report (anonymously submitted, possibly Mark Shoulson) said
> that it was "being worked on" by the submitter, who was apparently the only
> one involved.
>
>          I also suggest translating existing documents into a code with
>>         members
>>         of the LLG (or at least by le jatna) signing them as official
>> ones.
>>
>>
>>     Not sure what this means.  Code kia?  Which existing documents?  Any
>>     translation of the Bylaws that was going to supplant the current
>>     English ones would probably have to be approved as a Bylaw amendment
>>     in order to be treated as "official".
>>
>>
>> Your replies showed that the Bylaws can be superseded by other bylaws
>> that weren't even published.
>>
>
> So far as I know, no Bylaws have been superseded, and there are no
> unpublished bylaws.  So I have no idea what you are referring to.


I'm referring to your words: "They are supposed to be, but that item of the
bylaws has more or less been superseded with online meetings by the
non-publication of minutes."


>
>  This hampers the development of the existing and new projects.
>>
>
> It shouldn't.  There is absolutely no mention of "projects" in the bylaws.
>
> If someone wants a new project, then per 2002 minutes:
>
>> John Cowan proposed that we institute official LLG projects as follows:
>>
>>     Leader of project presents it to President.
>>     President consults Board.
>>     If Board approves, transmit information to Webmaster to post on
>> official project list.
>>     Webmaster to poll project leaders at least every 3 months.
>>     Project leaders must then report to Board.
>>     Board may decide to not continue project as official.
>>
>
> the following amendment was incorporated before approval (amendments a and
> b from the minutes)
>
>  That the initiators mail the request to both webmaster and president,
>> and if there is no response from the Board in an agreed-upon time
>> frame it will mean it's automatically added to the official project
>> list as "no objection"
>>
>
> I haven't seen any proposed projects submitted to the Board since then.  I
> can accept that people may not know the above procedure, which probably
> should be added to the project page.  What Robin appears to have
> implemented was a more informal method that hasn't gone to the Board, but
> it looks like the reporting scheme completely broke down by 2006 and most
> projects never had a single report submitted.
>
> It's a nice idea, but no one wants to do the necessary paperwork, as is
> true for most LLG efforts.
>
>
>  If there was an official list of bylaws that are not superseded then we
>> would be able to translate them to Lojban.
>>
>
> http://www.lojban.org/tiki/Bylaws+of+The+Logical+Language+Group%2C+Inc.
>
> no changes since 2007.
>
> The Lojban license was put up by Robin and not modified since 2005.
>
> http://www.lojban.org/tiki/LLG+Web+Copyright+License
>
> The 1997 and 2002 statements haven't been modified since they were
> produced.
>
>
>  People would be able to rely on them knowing that those bylaws are not
>> superseded.
>>
>
> Bylaws cannot be superseded without a vote that meets the criteria
> specified in the Bylaws themselves.
>
>
>  If any bylaw can be ignored/superseded at any time and no one in the
>> world (except members of the LLG) knows about them then
>> why do we have those bylaws?
>>
>
> If someone official ignores a bylaw, any member (and probably any
> non-member as well) can object, most easily via point of order during a
> meeting.  It then must be dealt with under the rules for parliamentary
> procedure.
>
> I'm not sure how much non-members are likely to be affected by changes to
> the Bylaws, without any specific examples.
>
>      Of course, given that CLL is one of the baseline documents, you may
>>     be calling for a translation of CLL into Lojban.  That would be an
>>     interesting challenge, and a rather voluminous one.  We'd need
>>     all-Lojban dictionary-quality gismu and cmavo lists too, and I never
>>     did accomplish the dictionary-quality cmavo list in English.
>>
>> This project is
>> 1. time-consuming
>> 2. we don't have a working platform for doing CLL 1.1 even in English
>>
>
> Correct.  Hence, nothing gets done.
>
>
>  My personal view is that linking to examples using numbers is a bad
>> practice in CLL but since it is the official refgram and not a tutorial
>>
>
> It is a book, one of those things that appears in print, and it is the
> norm in such books that examples are numbered and referred to by number in
> the text.
>
> Hypertext can avoid such inconveniences, but at least so far, we are
> dealing with print as well as on-line.  That would likely be true of a
> Lojban version as well.  I certainly wouldn't ever try to read 600 pages in
> Lojban on a computer screen (or on a Kindle for that matter - I haven't
> read that much text yet on a Kindle in English)
>
>
>  Anyway CLL partially works as a good tutorial too (as others are
>> criticized by many people coming to IRC channel). This means that
>> translating CLL into Lojban itself is partially useless since many
>> concepts and parts of grammar in Lojban explain themselves.
>>
>
> Nothing explains itself.  And the purpose would be to meet the standard
> that all of our official documents be produced in Lojban (whether or not
> they would be used much in the Lojban form isn't the primary consideration)
>
>          Official documents initially written in Lojban can be translated
>> to
>>         English later.
>>
>>     Which ones are those?
>>
>> You decide. I imagine the full code including all documents that
>> describe how LLG and BPFK works.
>>
>
> None of them were originally written in Lojban, and as yet, none have been
> translated, so your response doesn't answer your original statement about
> said initially written ones.
>

If published bylaws are all still valid and we can accet them as ultimate
truth then we ofc. can translate them. But by "we" I suppose only members
of LLG which I'm not.


> Most people knowing that the documents were initially written in English
> would read them in English UNLESS a) they were seeking the experience of
> reading the Lojban text or b) the Lojban text officially superseded the
> English original, which would be replaced by a back-translation.
>
>
>  This all looks strange. It sound like all members say "Yeah, I support
>> Lojban but I'm not going to learn it".
>>
>
> Yep.
>
>  Why so?
>>
>
> In some cases, because they got involved when there wasn't a language to
> learn.  In others like myself, I learned it but haven't recently spent
> enough time to maintain my skill (and for me, I have never learned a
> language other than English to the point of being able to think in that
> language - I came close with 6-year-old Russian but couldn't understand
> adults, but Lojban in my mind is always glossed to English before being
> interpreted.)
>
>
>  Why not add people to LLG and BPFK that can produce correct Lojban
>> sentences at least in written form?
>>
>
> LLG pretty much takes anyone who wants to join and is committed to the
> goals and responsibilities of membership (which are primarily
> organizational - see the Bylaws).


^ I will reply later to this.


>   BPFK takes people under whatever conditions the jatna sets.


Robin  said anyone could name themselves a member of BPFK.

  I suspect right now merely being willing to DO something is the primary
> requirement.  Actual skill in Lojban is secondary to that.
>
> Your suggestion might be ideal, but beggars can't be choosers.
>
> At one time Pierre was leading a project to come up with a means of
> certifying various sorts of Lojban skill levels.  That project, like almost
> all others, seems to have produced very little beyond intentions.

-- 
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 email 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.

--047d7bae46a8fe42e505014c1657
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><br><div class=3D"gmail=
_quote">2014-08-23 17:14 GMT+04:00 Robert LeChevalier <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt=
;<a href=3D"mailto:lojbab@lojban.org" target=3D"_blank">lojbab@lojban.org</=
a>&gt;</span>:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"">On 8/23/2014 12:33 AM, Gleki Arxokuna wrot=
e:<br>

</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;b=
order-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:s=
olid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"">
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Probably.=C2=A0 I&#39;m not sure that I could do it, and actu=
ally be able to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 communicate.<br>
<br></div><div class=3D"">
There are enough speakers in IRC who can at least produce Lojban<br>
sentences if not in real time but at least with the help of a dictionary.<b=
r>
</div></blockquote>
<br>
But the suggestion specified meetings by email, not on IRC.=C2=A0</blockquo=
te><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Bob, I only mean that Lojban nowadays=
 is not a project but a fully blown USABLE and USED language. There are flu=
ent speakers.</div>
<div>There are enough people who talk to each other in Lojban and understad=
 each other.</div><div><br></div><div>That&#39;s why allowing people who ca=
n produce correct sentences in Lojban should be forbidden.</div><div>Speaki=
ng Lojban only is not a problem for a lot of people.</div>
<div>Then why are we still talking about Lojban not in Lojban?</div><div>I =
suggest that you allow fluent speakers + those who can produce correct disc=
ourses in written form like in email lists.</div><div><br></div><div>Look h=
ow many of them:=C2=A0<a href=3D"http://www.lojban.org/resources/irclog/loj=
ban/">http://www.lojban.org/resources/irclog/lojban/</a><br>
The IRC chat is active.</div><div><br></div><div>From this thread I can con=
firm that selpa&#39;i is a fluent speaker, even la mukti (ba&#39;anairu&#39=
;e) can produce fine sentences.</div><div><br></div><div>We are not discuss=
ing issues or reforming Lojban (I&#39;m completely on rlpowell&#39;s side i=
n this matter).</div>
<div><br></div><div>If a person can speak fluent Lojban why disallow him/he=
r from BPFK and LLG?</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><blockquote class=
=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;bo=
rder-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
 I don&#39;t even think of IRC most of the time, even when I have dead time=
, and certainly not when I am actively running a meeting.=C2=A0 (And this p=
resumes that one of those speakers on IRC is actually there when someone ha=
s a question; my experience has been something like a 50% rate of even gett=
ing a single response when I get on IRC, and usually that is merely a greet=
ing.=C2=A0 Only once in many years have I found a conversation going on at =
all, and it was in English.</blockquote>
<div><br></div><div>I remember you logged in only once during the last 6 mo=
nths or so. .uinai at that time =C2=A0was sleeping. However, this link show=
s that IRC covers the most important part of Lojbanic activity.</div><div><=
a href=3D"http://www.lojban.org/resources/irclog/lojban/">http://www.lojban=
.org/resources/irclog/lojban/</a><br>
</div><div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px =
0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);bord=
er-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D""><br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex">
You response surprises me.<br>
Non-Lojbanists might conclude that Lojban is not even a working language.<b=
r>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Any conclusion about Lojban reached based on the voting membership, many of=
 whom date from when Lojban was NOT a working language, would be bound to b=
e erroneous.=C2=A0 Then bear in mind that the primary focus of the membersh=
ip is on organizational matters rather than Lojban matters.<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Well, as for financial issues sure, LLG me=
mbers might know nothing about Lojban.</div><div>But in general this situat=
ion is silly. What are we here for if not to learn Lojban and produce texts=
 in it?</div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0p=
x 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-lef=
t-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
One might question the fact that almost all discussions of byfy matters has=
 been in English rather than in Lojban (even when conducted by people who h=
ave demonstrated the ability to write voluminously in Lojban).=C2=A0 But of=
 course if they were in Lojban, there would be zero chance that I would rea=
d them, for example.</blockquote>
<div><br></div><div>When Lojban was being developed people need to somehow =
explain that &quot;This construct is translated into English as..., use it =
in these situations: ...&quot;</div><div><br></div><div>At that time Englis=
h was a platform to build Lojban.</div>
<div><br></div><div>However, nowadays Lojban is mostly complete and there i=
s no need in English.</div><div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote"=
 style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:=
rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
=C2=A0 I could do so, but it hasn&#39;t been my priority given the lack of =
time I have been spending in recent years.=C2=A0 I could wish it were other=
wise, but it isn&#39;t.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Well, of course. Bu=
t do you wish other people continue the great work you&#39;ve done in past?=
 If so the number of written stuff in Lojban should increase over time.</di=
v>
<div><br></div><div>More and more people should become fluent speakers. Nob=
ody forbids you to use English or any other languages of course.</div><div>=
It just appears that English is used to the detriment of Lojban these days.=
</div>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex"><div class=3D""><br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex">
However, is it culturally neutral to continue using non-Lojban for that?<br=
>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
No, but the purpose of LLG meetings is to get LLG business done (and do so =
as quickly as possible, since business matters aren&#39;t the highest lojba=
n-related priority for much of anyone in the community except possibly me),=
 not demonstrate cultural neutrality.<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>What business? If selling books then of co=
urse (Lojbanistan is non-existent, neither The Bank of Lojban).</div><div><=
br></div><div>But the bylaws, LLG minutes were written in English which is =
completely crazy.</div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0p=
x 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-lef=
t-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"">
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 We aren&#39;t getting a set of meeting minutes in English.=C2=
=A0 Do you think<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Robin will be able to more easily produce them in Lojban?=C2=
=A0 And he is<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 presumably as fluent a Lojbanist as we have.<br>
<br></div><div class=3D"">
I didn&#39;t know he couldn&#39;t. I thought only a lack of his time could<=
br>
prevent him from doing so.<br>
</div></blockquote>
<br>
Lack of time is precisely the reason.=C2=A0 And for most of us, dealing wit=
h Lojban text (either writing it or reading it) takes a lot more time than =
dealing with English.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Well, you are not goi=
ng to rename this community into {ju&#39;i glipli}, do you? ;)</div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0p=
x 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-lef=
t-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D""><br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex">
But even then assign other people for that. E.g. I can do initial<br>
translation and you can check them afterwards (since not I will be<br>
signing them anyway).<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
No one produces minutes in English, so you have nothing to translate.<br>
<br>
And I personally wouldn&#39;t likely have the time to check and substantial=
 amount of text written in Lojban for validity, much less correctness of tr=
anslation.<br>
<br>
But the people who originally proposed doing meetings in Lojban 10+ years a=
go. never even produced a set of Lojban bylaws, which would undoubtedly be =
the first required official document.<br>
<br>
Indeed I just checked and the whole effort to do meetings in Lojban appears=
 to have been approved in 2002 but was removed and/or tabled indefinitely i=
n 2003.=C2=A0 The one remaining motion approved in 2002 and never supersede=
d, was that official stuff on the web be translated into Lojban.=C2=A0 So f=
ar as I know, absolutely nothing was ever done on this by the people advoca=
ting it.<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Why not start from the beginning? Now we d=
o have people who can not only translate existing bylaws but to produce new=
 ones from scratch?</div><div><br></div><div>I want the community to go for=
ward. Shall we continue making no headway?</div>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex">
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"">
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 We would have to start by having a translation of the Bylaws =
into<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Lojban (and agreeing on that translation).=C2=A0 I would then=
 suggest<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 translating whichever book of parliamentary procedure that Jo=
hn<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Cowan specifies into Lojban.=C2=A0 Otherwise we lack the term=
inology for<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 a parliamentary meeting.<br>
<br></div><div class=3D"">
Terminology can be made on the flow during translations with adding them<br=
>
to jbovlaste.<br>
</div></blockquote>
<br>
They can be, but they aren&#39;t.=C2=A0 And it has been noted that there ar=
e active people nowadays who don&#39;t know how to add to jbovlaste even th=
ough there are instructions.</blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><div=
>
All of the active speakers I know of know how to add words to jbovlaste.</d=
iv><div>So for them this is not a problem.</div><div><br></div><blockquote =
class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1=
px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:=
1ex">
 (I don&#39;t claim to be active in this sense, and I also do not know how =
because I haven&#39;t bothered to figure it out, never having wanted to add=
 a word.)<br>
<br>
Remember, BTW, that jbovlaste is an official project, but its contents are =
not automatically &quot;official&quot; merely by being added.=C2=A0 We&#39;=
d need some sort of formally published dictionary, approved by byfy and/or =
LLG (depending on the conditions specified in the 2002 statement).<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Great. =C2=A0Why not start discussing the =
new dictionary (discussing in Lojban ofc.)?</div><div><br></div><blockquote=
 class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:=
1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left=
:1ex">

<br>
There is an official project to come up with Lojban parliamentary terms, bu=
t the one report (anonymously submitted, possibly Mark Shoulson) said that =
it was &quot;being worked on&quot; by the submitter, who was apparently the=
 only one involved.<br>

<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"">
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 I also suggest translating existing documents i=
nto a code with<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 members<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 of the LLG (or at least by le jatna) signing th=
em as official ones.<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Not sure what this means.=C2=A0 Code kia?=C2=A0 Which existin=
g documents?=C2=A0 Any<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 translation of the Bylaws that was going to supplant the curr=
ent<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 English ones would probably have to be approved as a Bylaw am=
endment<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 in order to be treated as &quot;official&quot;.<br>
<br>
<br></div><div class=3D"">
Your replies showed that the Bylaws can be superseded by other bylaws<br>
that weren&#39;t even published.<br>
</div></blockquote>
<br>
So far as I know, no Bylaws have been superseded, and there are no unpublis=
hed bylaws.=C2=A0 So I have no idea what you are referring to.</blockquote>=
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div>I&#39;m referring to your words: &quot;T=
hey are supposed to be, but that item of the bylaws has more or less been s=
uperseded with online meetings by the non-publication of minutes.&quot;=C2=
=A0</div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0p=
x 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-lef=
t-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D""><br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex">
This hampers the development of the existing and new projects.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
It shouldn&#39;t.=C2=A0 There is absolutely no mention of &quot;projects&qu=
ot; in the bylaws.<br>
<br>
If someone wants a new project, then per 2002 minutes:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex">
John Cowan proposed that we institute official LLG projects as follows:<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Leader of project presents it to President.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 President consults Board.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 If Board approves, transmit information to Webmaster to post =
on official project list.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Webmaster to poll project leaders at least every 3 months.<br=
>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Project leaders must then report to Board.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Board may decide to not continue project as official.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
the following amendment was incorporated before approval (amendments a and =
b from the minutes)<br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex">
That the initiators mail the request to both webmaster and president,<br>
and if there is no response from the Board in an agreed-upon time<br>
frame it will mean it&#39;s automatically added to the official project<br>
list as &quot;no objection&quot;<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I haven&#39;t seen any proposed projects submitted to the Board since then.=
=C2=A0 I can accept that people may not know the above procedure, which pro=
bably should be added to the project page.=C2=A0 What Robin appears to have=
 implemented was a more informal method that hasn&#39;t gone to the Board, =
but it looks like the reporting scheme completely broke down by 2006 and mo=
st projects never had a single report submitted.<br>

<br>
It&#39;s a nice idea, but no one wants to do the necessary paperwork, as is=
 true for most LLG efforts.<div class=3D""><br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex">
If there was an official list of bylaws that are not superseded then we<br>
would be able to translate them to Lojban.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div><a href=3D"http://www.lojban.org/tiki/Bylaws+of+The+Logical+Language+=
Group%2C+Inc" target=3D"_blank">http://www.lojban.org/tiki/<u></u>Bylaws+of=
+The+Logical+<u></u>Language+Group%2C+Inc</a>.<br>
<br>
no changes since 2007.<br>
<br>
The Lojban license was put up by Robin and not modified since 2005.<br>
<br>
<a href=3D"http://www.lojban.org/tiki/LLG+Web+Copyright+License" target=3D"=
_blank">http://www.lojban.org/tiki/<u></u>LLG+Web+Copyright+License</a><br>
<br>
The 1997 and 2002 statements haven&#39;t been modified since they were prod=
uced.<div class=3D""><br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex">
People would be able to rely on them knowing that those bylaws are not<br>
superseded.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Bylaws cannot be superseded without a vote that meets the criteria specifie=
d in the Bylaws themselves.<div class=3D""><br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex">
If any bylaw can be ignored/superseded at any time and no one in the<br>
world (except members of the LLG) knows about them then<br>
why do we have those bylaws?<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
If someone official ignores a bylaw, any member (and probably any non-membe=
r as well) can object, most easily via point of order during a meeting.=C2=
=A0 It then must be dealt with under the rules for parliamentary procedure.=
<br>

<br>
I&#39;m not sure how much non-members are likely to be affected by changes =
to the Bylaws, without any specific examples.<br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"">
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Of course, given that CLL is one of the baseline documents, y=
ou may<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 be calling for a translation of CLL into Lojban.=C2=A0 That w=
ould be an<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 interesting challenge, and a rather voluminous one.=C2=A0 We&=
#39;d need<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 all-Lojban dictionary-quality gismu and cmavo lists too, and =
I never<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 did accomplish the dictionary-quality cmavo list in English.<=
br>
<br></div><div class=3D"">
This project is<br>
1. time-consuming<br>
2. we don&#39;t have a working platform for doing CLL 1.1 even in English<b=
r>
</div></blockquote>
<br>
Correct.=C2=A0 Hence, nothing gets done.<div class=3D""><br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex">
My personal view is that linking to examples using numbers is a bad<br>
practice in CLL but since it is the official refgram and not a tutorial<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
It is a book, one of those things that appears in print, and it is the norm=
 in such books that examples are numbered and referred to by number in the =
text.<br>
<br>
Hypertext can avoid such inconveniences, but at least so far, we are dealin=
g with print as well as on-line.=C2=A0 That would likely be true of a Lojba=
n version as well.=C2=A0 I certainly wouldn&#39;t ever try to read 600 page=
s in Lojban on a computer screen (or on a Kindle for that matter - I haven&=
#39;t read that much text yet on a Kindle in English)<div class=3D"">
<br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex">
Anyway CLL partially works as a good tutorial too (as others are<br>
criticized by many people coming to IRC channel). This means that<br>
translating CLL into Lojban itself is partially useless since many<br>
concepts and parts of grammar in Lojban explain themselves.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Nothing explains itself.=C2=A0 And the purpose would be to meet the standar=
d that all of our official documents be produced in Lojban (whether or not =
they would be used much in the Lojban form isn&#39;t the primary considerat=
ion)<br>

<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"">
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Official documents initially written in Lojban =
can be translated to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 English later.<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Which ones are those?<br>
<br></div><div class=3D"">
You decide. I imagine the full code including all documents that<br>
describe how LLG and BPFK works.<br>
</div></blockquote>
<br>
None of them were originally written in Lojban, and as yet, none have been =
translated, so your response doesn&#39;t answer your original statement abo=
ut said initially written ones.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>If publ=
ished bylaws are all still valid and we can accet them as ultimate truth th=
en we ofc. can translate them. But by &quot;we&quot; I suppose only members=
 of LLG which I&#39;m not.</div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0p=
x 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-lef=
t-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Most people knowing that the documents were initially written in English wo=
uld read them in English UNLESS a) they were seeking the experience of read=
ing the Lojban text or b) the Lojban text officially superseded the English=
 original, which would be replaced by a back-translation.<div class=3D"">
<br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex">
This all looks strange. It sound like all members say &quot;Yeah, I support=
<br>
Lojban but I&#39;m not going to learn it&quot;.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Yep.<br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex">
Why so?<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
In some cases, because they got involved when there wasn&#39;t a language t=
o learn.=C2=A0 In others like myself, I learned it but haven&#39;t recently=
 spent enough time to maintain my skill (and for me, I have never learned a=
 language other than English to the point of being able to think in that la=
nguage - I came close with 6-year-old Russian but couldn&#39;t understand a=
dults, but Lojban in my mind is always glossed to English before being inte=
rpreted.)<div class=3D"">
<br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex">
Why not add people to LLG and BPFK that can produce correct Lojban<br>
sentences at least in written form?<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
LLG pretty much takes anyone who wants to join and is committed to the goal=
s and responsibilities of membership (which are primarily organizational - =
see the Bylaws).</blockquote><div><br></div><div>^ I will reply later to th=
is.</div>
<div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px =
0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-l=
eft-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">=C2=A0 BPFK takes people under whatever c=
onditions the jatna sets.</blockquote>
<div><br></div><div>Robin =C2=A0said anyone could name themselves a member =
of BPFK.</div><div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"mar=
gin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,2=
04);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
=C2=A0 I suspect right now merely being willing to DO something is the prim=
ary requirement.=C2=A0 Actual skill in Lojban is secondary to that.<br>
<br>
Your suggestion might be ideal, but beggars can&#39;t be choosers.<br>
<br>
At one time Pierre was leading a project to come up with a means of certify=
ing various sorts of Lojban skill levels.=C2=A0 That project, like almost a=
ll others, seems to have produced very little beyond intentions.</blockquot=
e>
</div></div></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;lojban&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">lojban+unsub=
scribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.=
com">lojban@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/lojban">http:=
//groups.google.com/group/lojban</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/optout">http=
s://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.<br />

--047d7bae46a8fe42e505014c1657--