Date: Thu, 13 Aug 92 04:37:47 -0400 From: lojbab@grebyn.com (Logical Language Group) Message-Id: <9208130837.AA03002@daily.grebyn.com> To: c.j.fine@bradford.ac.uk, nsn@mullian.ee.mu.oz.au Content-Length: 105621 Lines: 1903 In accordance with the Bylaws, notice is hereby given that the Annual Meeting of the members of The Logical Language Group, Inc. will be held on Sunday, August 16, 1992 at 9:30AM EDT at the Corporation princi- pal office at 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax, Virginia 22031. This notice is being sent to all voting members of LLG, and to other people who are expected to be at the meeting, or who came last year and hence might be interested in attending this year, or who otherwise have a reason to be interested. According to the Bylaws, there is no requirement for prior announcement of the agenda of an annual meeting; all manner of business is in order. Actions can be taken by the members without the requirement of prior notice. However, Article 9 on Bylaw amendment states: A written notice shall have been sent to each member at his last known address at least ten (10) days before such Annual or Special meeting, which notice shall state the alterations, amendments, or changes which are proposed to be made in such By-Laws. Only such changes as have been specified in the notice shall be made. If, however, all the members shall be present at any regular or Special meeting, these By-Laws may be amended by unanimous vote, without any previous notice. Last year's annual meeting directed the inclusion of specific bylaw amendments in this year's agenda. In addition, an expected item for discussion, overseas members, prompts me to propose some Bylaw amendments in that subject area so as to allow such changes (not necessarily with the exact wording proposed - I have not interpreted that above Bylaw as confining Bylaw changes to the wording proposed in the announcement.) This announcement constitutes notice of these proposals per the above requirement. There is no quorum requirement for an annual meeting, but over 1/2 of all members must vote in favor of a Bylaw amendment for it to be effective. If you are a member, and do not plan to attend the meeting in person, we ask that you take one of the following actions: 1. Provide a written proxy, either stating your vote on proposed Bylaw amendments, or delegating your vote to another person you expect will be in attendance. We, or your delegated representative, must have your proxy at the start of the meeting. 2. Arrange for attendance by telephone, such that we will telephone you at a specific time to obtain your vote. This arrangement should include a written statement that you should be considered in attendance subject to such telephone consultation. We need this statement prior to the meeting. 3. Resign your membership so that your non-presence does not affect the vote totals. We expect that there will be members not in attendance at this meeting, hence your following the above procedures could be important to whether we can approve the Bylaw amendments. Proposed Agenda, as prepared by Bob LeChevalier (1) roll call (2) proof of notice of meeting or waiver of notice (3) reading of Minutes of preceding meeting a motion to waive this will be heard (4) reports of Officers a. President's report language status book status legal status 2 b. Secretary/Treasurer's report Bob LeChevalier will give a financial report on behalf of the Treasurer (5) reports of committees The only officially constituted committee is one consisting of Athelstan and Guy Garnett for evaluating and deciding on allocation of certain funds to support needy non-payees who want to receive our materials. This committee has been inactive due to Athelstan's injury, and is not expected to report. The President would like to solicit volunteers to spend a little time at LogFest or shortly afterwards to make the limited decisions applicable to this committee that need to be made. (5a) At this point in the agenda, a motion will be heard to consider unfinished business Bylaw Amendment number 5, as listed below, and to thereafter vote on possible new members who are present at the meeting. This may, at the discretion of members present, include the discussion of overseas members and associated Bylaw amendments per New Business. (6) Election of Directors The President is proposing a slate consisting of all current Directors except Athelstan, who is not yet recovered sufficiently to participate in active governance of the organization on a regular basis. (7) Unfinished Business a. Negotiation stance with the Institute Last year, the membership directed policy to be that there be no further expenditure of resources on negotiations with the Institute unless there is a change in their policy. In the last year, there have since been two events of change in their policy that have caused the President to determine that negotiations were appropriate. 1) Shortly before the oral arguments in TLI's legal appeal last November, there was indication that JCB was willing to meet with us when he visited Washington DC for the oral argu- ments. After consulting with the Board and determining that this was a significant change in their policy, Athelstan, John Cowan, and I prepared inputs for such a meeting and sent them to TLI. Part or all of these inputs are included as an attachment to this announcement. TLI indicated that they were not prepared to discuss on the basis of this agenda, and no meeting took place; the implication was that TLI's position was essentially unchanged, and that we had misread their intent with regard to the possibility of negotiation of a settlement. 2) After an initial feeler immediately after the Appeals Court decided in our favor last April, Robert McIvor, as an authorized representative of TLI, contacted me in June to in- dicate that TLI considers the legal battle to be at an end. He indicated that he was authorized to initiate negotiations with us, presuming our November agenda as a statement of our current position. He indicated that he was representing TLI, and not JCB in particular, JCB having delegated negotiation to McIvor and some unidentified-to-us Board Member. McIvor was one of the people present at the original meeting declaring "Lojban - A Realization of Loglan", and has often expressed some sympathy with our positions, though retaining loyalty to JCB. He is not currently an officer of TLI, though he is a Member, a Member of the Loglan Academy, and 'Chief Grammarian' of TLI Loglan as one of the original team of 3 Loglan YACCers. The initial position paper from TLI offered no significant change of position on their behalf, and indeed was offensively unacceptable, being essentially a call for the status quo ante the split with TLI, with TLI's policies intact and 'the Lojban experience' absorbed into TLI Loglan on a basis determined by their Academy. However there was some indication of another acceptable avenue, wherein each side would be allowed to present its case to the other organization's 'membership' (defined in our case probably as our JL subscribers and other active language users), with a vote being held to determine the nature of any merger of the two languages. I communicated the unacceptability of status quo ante the split, but indicated that the vote option may be acceptable to our membership, though I cautioned him that I saw no chance that our membership, however defined, would accept a return to the TLI Loglan version at this stage. I did indicate, and I believe, that we have a fair chance, on the other hand, of con- vincing a fair vote of the TLI membership to accept a conversion to Lojban done with consideration. Part or all of my response is included as an attachment. McIvor has indicated in response that his people are studying our response, and that he considers that there is likely benefit in continued negotiations. To this end, he has placed a paid order for materials through level 3 and a JL subscription, and has indicated interest in being consulted on any ongoing technical decisions to try to keep the two language versions from drifting further apart. He has also indicated that he has proposed and expects approval of some TLI Loglan changes inspired by our criticisms, that sound like they bring the two languages closer together. On the other hand, he did not see that progress was far enough along that there was benefit in his attending LogFest (though he did consider doing so), and he is instead proposing to visit here approximately the 1st of December while enroute to wintering in Florida. I have indicated to him that 1) I cannot promise to be available then due to my personal situa- tion, 2) I would need direction from the membership for further negotiations, and 3) that by December we would be likely to have at least one book published and would be far less likely to seriously consider any changes to Lojban in concession to TLI. There has been no further discussion at this writing, though I expect to see something more prior to LogFest, and will make same available to those who attend. I would like the membership to consider whether any changes to our negotiation policy and stance are in order, and will consider motions under Unfinished Business. b. Bylaw amendment Proposals forwarded from last year, per below. c. Modification of the Electronic Distribution Policy to eliminate the discussion of electronic checksums, which has proven technically impractical. d. A report on the grammar baseline status will be made. There is one significant grammar change proposal, and numerous minor changes, all intended for official incorporation at the time of the publication of the first book, expected this fall. (The major change does not noticeably affect much text that has been written, but implies a radical change in perspective on the se- mantics of relative clauses, and the grammar that dictates the choice of semantics, which is currently vague to the point of possibly being 'broken'). John Cowan and I are seeking con- 4 currence of the membership with this plan. (8) new business a. Consideration for baselining the rafsi list, after consensus regarding any changes deriving from Bob's rafsi analysis report, which we will discuss outside of the formal meeting. b. John Cowan has indicated intent to propose at least one new person from overseas (probably Nick Nicholas) and possibly more, for voting membership. These people are unlikely to attend meetings, making their participation perhaps problematical, but John argues that at least symbolically, LLG as an international effort should have at least some foreign members. Bob is proposing some possible Bylaw amendments below to resolve some of the problems that would be expected, which can be considered in conjunction with this discussion. c. Other new business as proposed Proposed Bylaw amendments Old business >From last years' meeting minutes: There was also a motion that we change the "10 days" notice for meetings to "15 days". However, since this was not on the agenda and not all members are present, the motion was withdrawn. However, we agreed that for the next meeting we would give 15 days notice. And, at the next annual meeting we would propose as changes to the bylaws: 1) at least 15 calendar days notice for the members' meeting. 2) at least 15 calendar days notice for all other required notices. 3) Change the agenda order such that the voting on new members be done just after the committee reports and before the election of directors. 1. Amendment to the Bylaws per the above: amend Article 3, Section 4, which reads: Section 4. Annual Meeting. The annual meeting of the members shall nominally be held at such place and time as the Directors shall designate. In the absence of any such designation, the annual meeting shall be held at the principal address of the organization on the first Sunday following the 20th day of June each year, at 10 o'clock in the morning of that day. The Secretary/Treasurer shall serve personally, or send through the post office, at least ten (10) days before such meeting a notice thereof, addressed to each member at his last known post office address; but at any meeting at which all members shall be present, or of which all members not present have waived notice in writing, the giving of notice as above required may be dispensed with. to read: Section 4. Annual Meeting. The annual meeting of the members shall nominally be held at such place and time as the Directors shall designate. In the absence of any such designation, the annual meeting shall be held at the principal address of the organization on the first Sunday following the 20th day of June each year, at 10 o'clock in the morning of that day. The Secretary/Treasurer shall serve personally, or send through the post office, at least fifteen (15) calendar days before any meeting a notice thereof, addressed to each member at his last known post office address; but at any meeting at which all members shall be present, or of which all members not present have waived notice in writing, the giving of 5 notice as above required may be dispensed with. 2. Amendment to the Bylaws per the above: amend Article 3, Section 5, which reads: Section 5. Special Meetings. Special meetings of the members, other than those regulated by Statute, may be called at any time by a majority of the Directors. The Secretary/Treasurer shall serve personally, or send through the post office, at least ten (10) days before such meeting a notice thereof, addressed to each member at his last known post office address. Such notice shall contain a statement of the business to be transacted at such meeting; at any meeting at which all members shall be present in person or by proxy, or for which members not present have waived notice in writing, the giving of notice as above described may be dispensed with. No business, other than that specified in the call for the meeting, shall be transacted at any Special meeting of the members. so that the second sentence reads: The Secretary/Treasurer shall serve personally, or send through the post office, at least ten (15) days before such meeting a notice thereof, addressed to each member at his last known post office ad- dress. 3. Amendment to the Bylaws per the above: amend Article 4, Section 6, which reads: Section 6. Notice of Meetings. Notice of meetings, other than the regular Annual meeting shall be given by service upon each Director in person, or by mailing to him at his last known post office ad- dress, at least ten (10) calendar days before the date therein designated for such meeting, including the day of mailing, of a written or printed notice thereof, specifying the time and place of such meeting, and the business to be brought before the meeting, and no business other than that specified in such notice shall be transacted at any Special meeting. However, at any meeting at which every member of the Board of Directors shall be present in person, by mail, or by telephone, although held without notice, any business may be transacted which might have been transacted if the meeting had been duly called. to read: Notice of meetings, other than the regular Annual meeting shall be given by service upon each Director in person, or by mailing to him at his last known post office address, at least fifteen (15) calendar days before the date therein designated for such meeting, including the day of mailing, of a written or printed notice thereof, specifying the time and place of such meeting, and the business to be brought before the meeting, and no business other than that specified in such notice shall be transacted at any Special meeting. Bob will oppose this amendment as written. The Board of Directors has not held a formal meeting in the last year, since due to Athelstan's injury, notice would have been required for any such meeting. The few issues that have come up warranting Board discussion, needed resolution more quickly than even the 10 days notice required by the Bylaws. Hence we were forced to consult by telephone among the remaining 4 Board members without formally conducting a meeting. This is an irregular way to run an organization; the Board of Directors is supposed to exist in order to allow day-to-day policy decisions to be made more rapidly than is possible when a Members' meeting must be called, and it isn't working. Amendments to the above amendment which allow for telephone and/or electronic mail notice certified in the minutes by the 6 Secretary/Treasurer, and/or an amendment which specifies the resignation or removal of a Board member who cannot/does not participate in meetings, can be considered (this paragraph constitutes notice of consideration of such amendments, with wording to be decided by the members present). 4. Amend Article 9, which reads: ARTICLE 9 Approval and Amendment of By-Laws These By-Laws shall be made, altered, amended, added to, or rescinded by a majority of the total current members of The Logical Language Group, Inc. at a meeting called for that purpose or at the annual meeting, with the following exceptions: a. any Bylaw dealing with the removal of Directors shall be made, altered, amended, or rescinded by a vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the total current members of The Logical Language Group, Inc. at a meeting called for that purpose. b. any amendments to Article 11 Dissolution shall be unanimously approved by the Board of Directors, proposed by them to the members, and approved at a meeting by two-thirds (2/3) of the members. A written notice shall have been sent to each member at his last known address at least ten (10) days before such Annual or Special meeting, which notice shall state the alterations, amendments, or changes which are proposed to be made in such By-Laws. Only such changes as have been specified in the notice shall be made. If, however, all the members shall be present at any regular or Special meeting, these By-Laws may be amended by unanimous vote, without any previous notice. so that the first sentence of the last paragraph reads: A written notice shall have been sent to each member at his last known address at least fifteen (15) days before such Annual or Special meeting, which notice shall state the alterations, amendments, or changes which are proposed to be made in such By- Laws. 5. Amend Article 3, Section 8, which reads: Section 8. Order of Business. The order of business of all meetings of the members shall be as follows: (1) roll call; (2) proof of notice of meeting or waiver of notice; (3) reading of Minutes of preceding meeting; (4) reports of Officers; (5) reports of committees; (6) election of Directors, if necessary; (7) unfinished business; (8) new business. In case of dispute over meeting procedures, Robert's Rules of Order shall serve as the basis of resolution, although a majority of members present may vote to override those rules on any question. to insert an item after (5), as follows: The order of business of all meetings of the members shall be as follows: (1) roll call; (2) proof of notice of meeting or waiver of notice; (3) reading of Minutes of preceding meeting; (4) reports of Officers; (5) reports of committees; (6) proposal and approval of new members (7) election of Directors, if necessary; (8) unfinished business; (9) new business. In case of dispute over meeting procedures, Robert's Rules of Order shall serve as the basis of resolution, although a majority of members present may vote to override those rules on any question. Bob will propose that this shall be amended to specifically indicate: "(6) proposal and approval of new members, who shall assume membership immediately if present at the meeting, or at the end of the meeting if not present." This prevents a paradox whereby new members (especially overseas ones who would not likely be present) might cause the meeting to no longer be in accordance with the bylaws due to lack of notice, etc. New Business Bob proposes for consideration the following amendments, related to the question of adding members who reside in other countries and are unlikely to be able to attend meetings. 6. Further amend Article 3, Section 4 to read (full text in old business - 1) The Secretary/Treasurer shall serve personally or by personal telephone conversation, or send through the post office or by electronic mail addressed to each member at his last known address, at least fifteen (15) days before such meeting a notice thereof; but at any meeting at which all members shall be present, or of which all members not present have waived notice in writing, the giving of notice as above required may be dispensed with. 7. Further amend Article 3, Section 5 to read (full text in old business - 2) The Secretary/Treasurer shall serve personally or by personal telephone conversation, or send through the post office or by electronic mail addressed to each member at his last known address, at least fifteen (15) days before such meeting a notice thereof. 8. Amend Article 3, Section 2, which reads: Section 2. Voting. Each member shall be entitled to one (1) vote, and all his right, title, and interest in and to the Corporation shall cease on termination of his membership. No member shall be entitled to share in the distribution of the Corporate assets upon the dissolution of the Corporation. Members may assign their vote to a representative by written proxy. so that the last sentence reads: Members may assign their vote to a representative by written or 8 electronically-mailed proxy, and/or may specify voting on specific issues in such a proxy. and add the following paragraph: Any member who does not expect to be physically present at a meeting may request that they be permitted to participate via telephone, mail, or electronic mail. The President or a majority of Members present physically or by proxy may also declare a meeting to extend to some or all Members not physically present. In either case, the meeting will be conducted in accordance with Section 7 below, with the President setting a reasonable time limit for responses before declaring voting closed on any issue. 9. Bob feels that all other references in the Bylaws which relate to notice and/or communication in connection with the rights and duties of members are vague enough to include the possibility of electronic mail as an alternate means of notice, or communication. However, notice is hereby given that members present may propose other amendments relating to the ability of overseas members to participate in governance of the organization, with specific wording to be approved at the meeting, and such amendments will be considered in order under the Bylaws. Date: Thu, 13 Aug 92 04:38:01 -0400 From: lojbab@grebyn.com (Logical Language Group) Message-Id: <9208130838.AA03004@daily.grebyn.com> To: c.j.fine@bradford.ac.uk, nsn@mullian.ee.mu.oz.au BYLAWS OF THE LOGICAL LANGUAGE GROUP, INC. ARTICLE 1 Name, Seal and Offices Section 1. Name. The name of this Corporation is THE LOGICAL LANGUAGE GROUP, INC., (A Non-Profit Corporation), and shall for convenience be referred to in this instrument as the Corporation. By a majority vote of the members, the Corporation may change its name. The Corporation may also operate under the trade name "Lojbangirz" at the discretion of the Board of Directors. Section 2. Offices. The principal office of the Corporation shall be at 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax, Virginia 22031. The Board of Directors may from time to time move the principal office to any other address in Virginia. ARTICLE 2 Purpose Section 1. Purpose. The Logical Language Group, Inc. is established to promote the scientific study of the relationships between language, thought and human culture; to investigate the nature of language and to determine the requirements for an artificially-engineered natural language; to implement and experiment with such a language; to devise and promote applications for this language in fields including but not limited to linguistics, psychology, philosophy, logic, mathematics, computer science, anthropology, sociology, education, and human biology; to conduct and support experimental and scholarly research in these fields as they may bear upon the problems of artificial language development; to communicate with and to educate interested persons and organizations about these activities; to devise and develop means and instruments needed for these activities; and to accumulate and publish the results of such studies and developments. In the furtherance of these purposes, and in addition to the above activities, The Logical Language Group, Inc. may award grants to individuals for experimentation, travel, publication, study and similar activities. Section 2. Allowable Actions. To these ends The Logical Language Group, Inc. shall receive and hold by bequest, devise, gift, grant, purchase, lease, or otherwise, any property, real, personal, tangible, or intangible, or any undivided interest therein, without limitation as to amount or value; to sell, convey, or otherwise dispose of any such property and to invest, re-invest, or deal with and administer the principal or the income thereof in such manner as, in the judgment of the Directors, will best promote the purposes of The Logical Language Group, Inc. without limitation, except such limitations, if any, as may be contained in the instrument under which such property is received, the Articles of Incorporation, these By-Laws, or any laws applicable thereto. Section 3. Disallowed Actions. Notwithstanding any of the provisions of the Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws, no member, Director, Officer, employee, or representative of this Corporation shall take any action or carry on any activity by or on behalf of the Corporation not permitted to be conducted or carried on by an organization exempt under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 and its regulations as they now exist, or as they may hereafter be amended, or by an organization, contributions to which are deductible under Section 170(c)(2) of such Code and regulations as they now exist, or as they may hereafter be amended. No member, Director, Officer, employee, or representative of this Corporation shall discriminate against any person on the basis of race, sex, religion or creed, or national origin while performing any action or carrying on any activity on behalf of the Corporation. ARTICLE 3 Members and Meeting of Members Section 1. Membership. The members of the Corporation shall initially consist of: Robert J. LeChevalier, Nora T. LeChevalier, John Parks-Clifford, Tommy Whitlock, Jeffrey Taylor. Other persons may be named members upon recommendation for membership by any member and by election by a majority of all the members of the Corporation, in person or by proxy. Such election need not take place at a formal meeting of the membership, but the Secretary/Treasurer shall be required to certify that a majority of the membership has supported the recommendation. Qualifications of persons proposed for membership shall be (a) competence in one or more of the fields of science or scholarship listed in Article 2, above, and/or (b) high personal dedication to the purposes of The Logical Language Group, Inc. as set forth in that Article. No potential member shall be discriminated against on the grounds of race, sex, religion or creed, or national origin. Section 2. Voting. Each member shall be entitled to one (1) vote, and all his right, title, and interest in and to the Corporation shall cease on termination of his membership. No member shall be entitled to share in the distribution of the Corporate assets upon the dissolution of the Corporation. Members may assign their vote to a representative by written proxy. Section 3. Resignation of Members. At any time, a member may resign his membership, which is hereby declared nontransferable, and his rights and responsibilities shall thereafter be immediately at an end. A member may resign from the Corporation by delivering a written resignation to the President or Secretary/Treasurer of the Corporation. A member shall also be considered to have resigned, if, after proper notice of an annual meeting has been sent, the member fails to submit a proxy or written intent to participate by telephone, AND, the members present at the meeting confirm by vote to accept this failure as a sign of resignation. Section 4. Annual Meeting. The annual meeting of the members shall nominally be held at such place and time as the Directors shall designate. In the absence of any such designation, the annual meeting shall be held at the principal address of the organization on the first Sunday following the 20th day of June each year, at 10 o'clock in the morning of that day. The Secretary/Treasurer shall serve personally, or send through the post office, at least ten (10) days before such meeting a notice thereof, addressed to each member at his last known post office address; but at any meeting at which all members shall be present, or of which all members not present have waived notice in writing, the giving of notice as above required may be dispensed with. Section 5. Special Meetings. Special meetings of the members, other than those regulated by Statute, may be called at any time by a majority of the Directors. The Secretary/Treasurer shall serve personally, or send through the post office, at least ten (10) days before such meeting a notice thereof, addressed to each member at his last known post office address. Such notice shall contain a statement of the business to be transacted at such meeting; at any meeting at which all members shall be present in person or by proxy, or for which members not present have waived notice in writing, the giving of notice as above described may be dispensed with. No business, other than that specified in the call for the meeting, shall be transacted at any Special meeting of the members. The Board of Directors shall also, in like manner, call a Special meeting of members whenever so requested in writing by not less than a majority of the members. Section 6. Quorum. Provided that notice of the meeting has been sent in accordance with Section 4 or Section 5, as appropriate, there shall be no minimum quorum for a meeting. Without such notice, a majority of the members must be present in order for a meeting to take place. Presence may be established in person, or by proxy. In addition, a member may be considered present through direct telephone contact or by mail participation as described in Section 7 below. In the event of there not being a quorum present, then the meeting shall be adjourned to some further date, not more than five (5) days later. Section 7. Meetings When Members are Apart. Meetings of members may be held in person or by the use of telephones or by the mails, or any combination thereof. Telephone meetings may be by conference, or telephone calls may be sequentially placed to all non-present members by the calling officer with at least one other person present as witness. Proposals may be made either orally or in writing, as the case may be, and adopted or rejected either orally or in writing, as if the meeting had been held in person. Except as otherwise provided by Statute, The Articles of Incorporation, or these Bylaws, all questions shall be decided by a majority of all members present or by proxy, mail, or telephone. Upon request by any member, all of the approving members on any decision shall manifest their consent in writing and such consent shall be filed in the Minutes Book. Provided that the Secretary/Treasurer or his/her designate shall certify that all members have been included in the meeting by attendance, by telephone, or by mail, an adopted action may be implemented before such written consent is obtained. Section 8. Order of Business. The order of business of all meetings of the members shall be as follows: (1) roll call; (2) proof of notice of meeting or waiver of notice; (3) reading of Minutes of preceding meeting; (4) reports of Officers; (5) reports of committees; (6) election of Directors, if necessary; (7) unfinished business; (8) new business. In case of dispute over meeting procedures, Robert's Rules of Order shall serve as the basis of resolution, although a majority of members present may vote to override those rules on any question. Section 9. The Board of Directors may establish a Sustaining Membership, independent of the governing membership described in the previous sections of this article. The qualifications for sustaining members shall include a minimum annual financial donation to the organization, the amount to be set by the Board, and other qualifications may be added by the Board. The Board will also set forth any benefits of Sustaining Membership. Any and all provisions elsewhere in these Bylaws relating to "members", shall not be interpreted to mean "sustaining members", although there is no restriction or penalty against a person being both a voting member and a sustaining member, gaining the responsibilities and benefits of each role. No potential sustaining member shall be discriminated against on the grounds of race, sex, religion or creed, or national origin. ARTICLE 4 Directors All the Corporate powers, except such as are otherwise provided for in these By-Laws, the Articles of Incorporation, and the Laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, shall be and are hereby vested in and shall be exercised by the Board of Directors. The Board of Directors may by general resolution delegate to committees of its own number, or to Officers of the Corporation, such powers as it may see fit. Section 1. Number. The affairs and business of this Corporation shall be managed by a Board of Directors, who shall be members of the Corporation, and at least one (1) of such Directors shall be a resident of the Commonwealth of Virginia and a citizen of the United States. The initial members of the Board of Directors shall be as per the Articles of Incorporation, which members shall serve until the first Annual Meeting of the members. Section 2. How Elected. At the Annual Meeting of members, the three (3) persons receiving a plurality of the votes cast and up to four (4) additional persons receiving a majority of votes shall be Directors and shall constitute the Board of Directors for the ensuing year. Section 3. Term of Office. The term of office of each of the Directors shall be one (1) year, and thereafter until his successor has been elected. Section 4. Duties of Directors. The Board of Directors shall have the control and general management of the affairs and business of this Corporation. Such Board of Directors shall in all cases act as a Board, regularly convened, by a majority, and it may adopt such rules and regulations for the conduct of its meetings and the management of the Corporation as it may deem proper, not inconsistent with the Articles of Incorporation, these By-Laws, and the Laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. Section 5. Directors' Meetings. Regular meetings of the Board of Directors shall be held immediately following the Annual Meeting of the members and at such other times as the Board of Directors may determine. Special meetings of the Board of Directors may be called by the President at any time, and shall be called by the President or Secretary/Treasurer upon the written request of two (2) Directors. Meetings of Directors may be held in person or by the use of telephones or by the mails, or any combination thereof. Telephone meetings may be by conference, or telephone calls may be sequentially placed to all Directors by the calling officer with at least one other person present as witness. Proposals may be made either orally or in writing, as the case may be, and adopted or rejected either orally or in writing, as if the meeting had been held in person. Upon request of any Director with regard to any decision of the Board, all of the approving Directors shall manifest their consent in writing and such consent shall be filed in the Minutes Book. Provided that the Secretary/Treasurer or his/her designate shall certify that all Directors have been included in the meeting by attendance, by telephone, or by mail, an adopted action may be implemented before such written consent is obtained. Section 6. Notice of Meetings. Notice of meetings, other than the regular Annual meeting shall be given by service upon each Director in person, or by mailing to him at his last known post office address, at least ten (10) calendar days before the date therein designated for such meeting, including the day of mailing, of a written or printed notice thereof, specifying the time and place of such meeting, and the business to be brought before the meeting, and no business other than that specified in such notice shall be transacted at any Special meeting. However, at any meeting at which every member of the Board of Directors shall be present in person, by mail, or by telephone, although held without notice, any business may be transacted which might have been transacted if the meeting had been duly called. Section 7. Quorum. At any meeting of the Board of Directors, a majority of the Board shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business; but in the event of a quorum not being present, then the meeting shall be adjourned to some future time, not more than five (5) days later. When a meeting is held by sequential telephone calls or by mail, quorum requirements shall be considered fulfilled provided that all Board members have been consulted per the requirements of Section 5, or that, if a meeting was held with proper notice in accordance with Section 6, a majority of the Board was successfully consulted with attempts having been made to consult with all members. Section 8. Voting. At all meetings of the Board of Directors, each Director is to have one (1) vote. Section 9. Vacancies. Whenever any vacancy shall occur in the Board of Directors by death, resignation, removal or otherwise, the same shall be filled without undue delay by a majority vote by ballot of the remaining members of the Board at a Special meeting which shall be called for that purpose. Such election shall be held within fifteen (15) days after the occurrence of such vacancy. The person so chosen shall hold office until the next Annual meeting or until his successor shall have been chosen at a Special meeting of the members. Section 10. Removal of Directors. Any one or more of the Directors may be removed either with or without cause, at any time, by a vote of at least two-thirds (2/3) of the total membership voting in person or by proxy, at any Special meeting called for that purpose, or at the Annual Meeting. ARTICLE 5 Officers Section 1. Number. The Officers of this Corporation shall be: 1. President. 2. Vice-President. 3. Secretary/Treasurer. Section 2. Election. All Officers of the Corporation shall be elected annually by the Board of Directors at its meeting held immediately after the meeting of members, and shall hold office for the term of one (1) year, or until their successors are duly elected. Officers may succeed themselves. Section 3. Duties of Officers. The duties and powers of the officers of the Corporation shall be as follows: PRESIDENT The President shall preside at all meetings of the Board of Directors and members. He shall present at each Annual Meeting of the members and Directors a report of the condition of the business of the Corporation. He shall cause to be called regular and special meetings of the members and Directors in accordance with these By-Laws. He shall appoint and remove, employ and discharge, and fix the compensation of all servants, agents, employees and clerks of the Corporation other than the duly appointed Officers, subject to the approval of the Board of Directors. He shall sign and make all contracts and agreements in the name of the Corporation, and see that they are properly carried out. He shall see that the books, reports, and statements required by the Statutes are properly kept, made and filed according to law. He shall sign checks, notes, drafts, or bills of exchange, warrants or other orders for the payment of money. He shall enforce these By-Laws and perform all the duties incident to the position and office, and which are required by law. VICE-PRESIDENT During the absence or inability of the President to render and perform his duties or exercise his powers, as set forth in these By-Laws or in the acts under which this Corporation is organized, the same shall be performed and exercised by the Vice-President; and when so acting, he shall have all the powers and be subject to all responsibilities hereby given to or imposed upon such President. SECRETARY/TREASURER The Secretary/Treasurer shall keep the Minutes of the meetings of the Board of Directors and of the members in appropriate books. He shall give and serve all notices of the Corporation. He shall be custodian of the records of the Corporation. He shall present to the Board of Directors at its stated meetings all communications addressed to him officially by the President or any Officer or member of the Corporation. He shall attend to all correspondence and perform all the duties incident to the office of Secretary/Treasurer. He shall have the care and custody of and be responsible for all the funds and securities of the Corporation, and shall deposit all such funds in the name of the Corporation in such bank or banks, trust company or trust companies or safe deposit vaults as the Board of Directors may designate. He shall sign, make and endorse in the name of the Corporation, checks, notes, drafts, bills of exchange, warrants and orders for the payment of money and pay out and dispose of same and receipt therefore, under the direction of the President or the Board of Directors. He shall exhibit at all reasonable times his books and accounts to any Director or member of the Corporation upon application at the office of the Corporation. He shall render a statement of the condition of the finances of the Corporation at each regular meeting of the Board of Directors, and at such other times as shall be required of him, and full financial report, at the Annual Meeting of the members. He shall keep at the office of the Corporation, correct books of account of all its business and transactions and such other books of account as the Board of Directors may require. He shall do and perform all duties appertaining to the office of Treasurer. Section 4. Vacancies, How Filled. All vacancies in any office, shall be filled by the Board of Directors without undue delay, at its regular meeting, or at a meeting specifically called for that purpose. Section 5. Compensation of Officers. The officers shall normally receive no salary or other compensation for the performance of their administrative services, but any officer may apply to the Board of Directors for compensation for performance of non-administrative services actually rendered to the Corporation in the furtherance of its purposes, as set forth in the Articles of Incorporation and as interpreted and implemented by the Board of Directors. Section 6. Removal of Officers. The Board of Directors may remove any officer, by at least a two-thirds (2/3) vote, at any time, with or without cause. Section 7. Initial Officers. The names of the Officers who shall serve until the first election are as follows: Name Office Post Office Address Robert J. LeChevalier President 2904 Beau Lane Fairfax, Virginia 22031 John Parks-Clifford Vice-President 6364 Washington St. Louis, Missouri 63130 Nora T. LeChevalier Secretary/Treasurer 2904 Beau Lane Fairfax, Virginia 22031 ARTICLE 6 Employees The Board of Directors shall hire and fix the compensation of any and all employees which it in its discretion may determine to be necessary in the conduct of the business of the Corporation. ARTICLE 7 Operating Expenses It is the intent of this Article to ensure the dedication of the bulk of the Corporation's resources to the activities directly related to the purposes cited in the Articles of Incorporation by minimizing the proportion of expenses in the Corporations overall operating budget that are unrelated to those purposes. The Board of Directors shall not authorize or expend on behalf of the Corporation as "administrative expenses" more than Fifteen (15%) Percent of the total expenditures of the Corporation in any one (1)- year period. Donations specifically allocated by a donor for an expense that would be counted as an administrative expense according to the definition in this article, will be omitted from the calculation of total expenditures and from the calculation of administrative expenditures, for purpose of determining the 15% limit. The words "administrative expenses" and the words "administrative services" mean expenses or services which do not directly advance the purposes of the Corporation as set out in the Articles of Incorporation and as interpreted and implemented by the Board of Directors. Such administrative expenses and services include, but are not limited to, the calling and conducting of corporate meetings, the making of management and/or financial decisions, fund-raising activities, the hiring and firing of personnel, accounting fees, legal fees, secretarial services, bookkeeping services, and correspondence and telephone conversations with anyone for purposes not directly relevant to those stated in the Articles of Incorporation. Such administrative expenses further include the cost of renting or purchasing equipment or space other than as directly used for the purposes set forth in the Articles of Incorporation. The Board of Directors shall ensure that the accounts of the Corporation accurately reflect this division between its administrative expenses and services and its expenditures that are directly relevant to the purposes stated in the Articles of Incorporation. The Board of Directors shall keep itself informed as to the proportion of the administrative expenses to prevent their exceeding the above maximum. Should the proportion of administrative expenses in any given fiscal year which do not derive from donations allocated by the donor for a specific administrative purpose, exceed the allowable maximum of Fifteen (15%) Percent, the Board of Directors shall ensure by its disbursement decisions during the following year that the total administrative expenses for the two (2) years shall fall within the allowable maximum. The Secretary/Treasurer shall report the amounts and percentage of expenditures for administrative and non-administrative purposes at the annual meeting of the members, prior to the election of the Board of Directors for the following year. ARTICLE 8 Relationship with Donors As it is the purpose of this Corporation to encourage the furtherance of its endeavors at a minimum of administrative expense, the existence of Article 7 of these By-Laws shall be explicitly emphasized to all individual or institutional donors of amounts greater than or equal to $100.00 prior to or at the time of such donation, and in all promulgations of the organization's annual financial report. In the event that small donations by a donor not otherwise receiving explicit emphasis of Article 7, total in excess of $100.00 over the course of a year, a notice emphasizing the Article's provisions will be sent at the end of the year. As part of such notices that are given, all contributors shall be encouraged to make their gifts conditional on the compliance of the Corporation with Article 7 of these By-Laws, with non-compliance of the terms of this Article 7 entitling the contributors to a refund of the gift up to the amount by which administrative expenses exceeded the limit stated in Article 7. ARTICLE 9 Approval and Amendment of By-Laws These By-Laws shall be made, altered, amended, added to, or rescinded by a majority of the total current members of The Logical Language Group, Inc. at a meeting called for that purpose or at the annual meeting, with the following exceptions: a. any Bylaw dealing with the removal of Directors shall be made, altered, amended, or rescinded by a vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the total current members of The Logical Language Group, Inc. at a meeting called for that purpose. b. any amendments to Article 11 Dissolution shall be unanimously approved by the Board of Directors, proposed by them to the members, and approved at a meeting by two-thirds (2/3) of the members. A written notice shall have been sent to each member at his last known address at least ten (10) days before such Annual or Special meeting, which notice shall state the alterations, amendments, or changes which are proposed to be made in such By-Laws. Only such changes as have been specified in the notice shall be made. If, however, all the members shall be present at any regular or Special meeting, these By- Laws may be amended by unanimous vote, without any previous notice. ARTICLE 10 Amendment of Articles of Incorporation The Articles of Incorporation may be amended after each Amendment shall be approved by the Board of Directors, proposed by them to the members, and approved at a members' meeting by a majority of the members, unless all of the Directors and all of the members sign a written statement, manifesting their intention that a certain Amendment to the Articles of Incorporation be made. An amendment to the Articles of Incorporation shall not be considered in force until filed in accordance with Laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. ARTICLE 11 Dissolution The Logical Language Group, Inc. shall be dissolved after unanimous approval of the Board of Directors, proposed by them to the members, and approved at a members' meeting by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the members. Upon the dissolution of The Logical Language Group, Inc. or the winding up of its affairs, the Directors shall distribute the assets of The Logical Language Group, Inc. exclusively to scientific, charitable, literary, or educational organizations which shall at the time qualify under the provisions of Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 and its regulations as they now exist, or as they may hereafter be amended. Date: Thu, 13 Aug 92 04:38:24 -0400 From: lojbab@grebyn.com (Logical Language Group) Message-Id: <9208130838.AA03010@daily.grebyn.com> To: c.j.fine@bradford.ac.uk, nsn@mullian.ee.mu.oz.au I expect to inform our membership of the existence and state of negotiations, but unless one of them asks, I expect that they will not see any actual postings except something that is sent as a 'formal proposal'. The following is not official policy of LLG. It is written for negotiation purposes only, and represents no commitments on the part of LLG. The following is written after consultation with pc and Nora. I may have a chance to consult with Cowan before sending it to you, but am cc'ing him and he can add in any comments as he wishes. The overwhelming sentiment from Nora and pc is that, while it is nice to see that TLI is again willing to talk, the negotiation position TLI has assumed is not very constructive. Summarizing, it appears that TLI has failed to recognize (or remember) why it is that LLG split off organizationally. The proposal basically returns all of those issues to status quo ante the split. The issues underlying the split, and indeed the political turmoil that has plagued the Loglan community since 1982 must be addressed and resolved to everyones satisfaction before organizational unity is even possible (and THEN we have to talk about how it could be made practical). The proposal also fails to recognize that LLG is substantially controlled by its members, and not by its Board. Many of those members have become involved since the split, and have no historical tie to TLI, nor the slightest loyalty to JCB. It will be a political battle to convince some of these people that negotiations are desirable and in order, and for such negotiations to succeed, they will have to believe that they stand to gain something substantial in return for any concessions made to TLI. Below, I've included an excerpt of Nora's minutes from last year's meeting; if it is not clear from this excerpt, it was the decided opinion of the membership at that meeting that LLG was in the stronger position both, organizationally, financially, and in terms of the robustness and actual use of its version of the language. Thus a common rationale for all of what I say below must be that in any case where LLG gives up some control over things it does now control, there must be some at least equivalent concession from TLI in favor of LLG. What JCB and TLI seems not to have realized is that the protracted legal battle has decidedly hurt JCB's and TLI's clout with the community. We have been forced to stand on our own for 5 years now in the face of total hostility, and have tripled the maximum size of TLI. Most of our more active people joined in that time period and have absolutely no reason to believe JCB or TLI to be necessary to the continuation of Lojban with or without the name 'Loglan'. They have been radicalized by the strife, and in effect have made some of us 'leaders' who started the fight among the most moderate in attitude towards JCB and TLI. In effect, to sell a reunited effort wherein LLG gives up anything at all, TLI must come up with reasons why we (the Loglan/Lojban community) should find its existence valuable. I believe it is not too late for this, but the minutes below show that the membership here now feels that JCB has become irrelevant to Loglan's success unless he again earns relevancy. This will no doubt be hard for him to swallow, and even I find that the disrespect for elders, their experience and authority, in the generation after me is difficult to deal with - but it is a fact of life. This response should be considered unofficial and is my own belief as to what the negotiating situation is, given my understanding of the members' positions. Some key definitions re: LLG and TLI that affect how I interpret the proposal. Members: has 5 definitions in LLG parlance. The largest definition is all of those on our active mailing lists, probably corresponding to the complete TLI mailing list, aound 950. Second is the active subscribers, numbering around 680, that get either JL or LK, corresponding to the old TL mailing list. Third are 'active Lojbanists', almost all JL subscribers (some people in Australia/New Zealand share a single subscription to save us all money), 244 for JL16 but only around 120 for JL17, probably corresponding to one of the two TLI memberships (the dues-paying one that no longer has policy-making power). The legal voting membership is 12, probably corresponding to the TLI voting membership - no dues are required, and membership is by invitation based on likeliness to participate in LLG governance. Finally, we have a defined class of 'sustaining membership' for financial supporters, but this has never been implemented. I am presuming that TLI still has the two classes: dues-paying members, and voting members. The latter, as I recall, consists of only a half dozen people, and may or may not be identical to the Board of Trustees. In my opinion, decisions about the fate of the language must be put to the dues-paying/active-Lojbanist level, if not to the larger community. Decisions on the fates and policies of the organizations can (and probably legally must) rest with the smaller governance memberships. I should note that there is significant sentiment within LLG for expanding the governance membership. Board: LLG has one entity called the Board - its Board of Directors. This is probably identical in function to the TLI Board back when you served on it, RAM, except that almost all of our meetings are held by telephone, and decisions are almost always made by consensus or unanimity. As President, I effectively serve at the pleasure of the Board. TLI at last report had two 'Boards', the Board of Trustees and The Board of Directors. The results of the 1983-4 political battles were, as I recall, to make the Board of Directors effectively powerless advisors to JCB, serving at the pleasure of the Board of Trustees or the voting membership - I can't recall which. One LLG complaint about the nature of TLI is that the Board of Trustees effectively consists of friends of JCB, and seem to consider their primary loyalty to be to him, and not to the membership, the community, or the language. Academy: TLI at last report had 3 members on its Academy - JCB, you, and Steve Rice. Frankly, based on what he's shown in his net postings and Lognet articles, Steve Rice's knowledge of the language sets a very low standard. LLG has no formal Academy. Our change approval process requires me to appoint an informal committee to review any proposed changes to baselines, reporting the results to the community which can override those decisions. The committee I use has a membership specific to the issue involved. Cowan, Nora, and I tend to be involved in most committees, and I try to include the proposer on the committee. A somewhat larger group has acquired the nickname "Jimbobs" and consists of those on the network who are actively writing or speaking the language. pc is included on a variety of groups specific to his interests, such as logic, as well as all 'major' issues, but hasn't been working actively with the language and doesn't feel qualified to work at the bits and pieces level in general. Attendees at LogFest constitute the effective committee for any proposals brought up during LogFest - this tends to be things like major baselines, etc., but also word proposals and whatever. We expect to discuss baselining our rafsi (affix) assignment list at the next LogFest. Following is an excerpt from last years' annual meeting minutes, which constitutes LLG's official policy on negotiations with TLI. " Negotiations with the Institute: Agreements made at members meeting authorizing the split were re- read. It was noted that we never got a positive response to our proposals. Discussion of "Do we still want to reconcile?" and "What would our aim be?"; the latter especially in the light of the fact that we have both gone public already. Art Weiners wishes it noted in the minutes that he would not vote the same on item #3 (at that member's meeting) now as he did then. Much discussion and motions/amendments on actual wording of policy regarding reconciliation. The original version was: MOVED: That: A) The policy of LLG be to continue to express an expressed desire of reconciliation with JCB and the Institute. B) There no longer be any special authority given to the pronouncements of JCB or the Institute about the language. and C) Lojban is Loglan. Much of the discussion was on point C: over whether they could/would be considered "fighting words"; whether we would be seen as not believing that "Loglan" is validly applied to our language. The sense of the attendees seemed to be that we did indeed believe that "Lojban is Loglan" (or at least "... a Loglan"), but that, if they might be considered fighting words, they would be counter-productive in a policy that expresses a desire for reconciliation. This is all the secretary's reading of what happened, put in for the benefit of those who were not present in order that they understand the areas of controversy; there may be differences of opinion with this reading. The final result was: MOVED: That: A) Expending resources towards a reconciliation with JCB or the Institute is not a good use of resources at this time, but we remain open to such a reconciliation should their position change in the future. and B) There no longer be any special authority given to the pronouncements of JCB or the Institute about the language. - PASSED. Specific response to TLI's proposal: > Reference is made to your letter of October last, of which you sent > me a copy on 3 May. Although now somewhat out of date with respect > to specific dates and participants, I will accept it as the LLG > position as to the relationship between LLG and TLI. It has not been specifically adopted by LLG or its Board, but is a statement reviewed by Cowan, Nora, and myself, and I think still is effectively our personal, if not official, policy. Per the last annual meeting as above, we probably cannot adopt an official policy unless TLI comes forth with a negotiating stance that seems constructive. I cannot yet call the current proposal a significant change in TLI's position as needed under that meeting's vote, though I'm hoping one will develop out of this exchange enough to put the issue to the membership attending at LogFest for consideration. > Although not a member of the TLI Board, I have been authorized to > discuss an accommodation with LLG on their behalf. Of course, any > agreement reached would have to be ratified by the TLI Board on our > side. I am prepared to discuss aspects as outlined in part III of > the a/m document. Similarly, any agreement would need ratification by at least our Board, and most likely our voting membership if any Bylaw action was required. The procedure for Bylaw changes is a bit cumbersome. Dissolution takes a unanimous vote of the Directors, and a 2/3 vote of the members. This is not politically likely in the near term regardless of the results of negotiations. > TLI agrees with the arguments in favour of a remerger as outlined > under your Option A, but if that is not possible, one of the other > options might also be considered. The position described below seems to in effect define 'remerger' of the language as secondary to remerger of the organizations. Our policy must be to insist that merger of the language be independent of the organizational issues, because since Lojban has been placed in the public domain, it exists independently of LLG. If LLG goes away, Lojban still exists (and no doubt a sizable group of people will simply form a new LLG or its equivalent to carry on). We have acted to make this situation the default, so as to prevent an organizational hijacking of the language, as we feel was the effect of the 1982-4 squabbles. Thus, pragmatically, any merger of the two languages requires a real political selling job on our part, or else it won't be accepted by the community. > TLI's proposals are as follows: 1. The Institute and LLG undergo a > de facto merger. LLG dissolves. This is politically impossible, as described above, until a long- standing record of cooperation is demonstrated, if even then. I suggest a proposal for an interim state leading to consideration of this as an option is the best you can hope for. However, I will discuss the following at least partially with such a hypothetical merger as a possibility though I myself would oppose it. I suspect that TLI would find the terms of any merger that we would have any chance to sell to our membership unacceptable at this time. > Members of LLG become members of the Institute automatically. Paid- > up members of LLG are given appropriate credit for Institute dues. > Members in arrears are forgiven their arrears and encouraged to join > the Institute. Types of membership need to be more clearly defined here. I am presuming non-voting membership based on context. LLG set up its memberships based on the opinion that TLI membership as currently constituted was meaningless. The only thing the dues-paying membership appears to get is a small discount on purchases and Lognet, the total value of which is almost negligible. I believe that we would be ethically required to offer refunds on JL subscriptions, for example, if JL were to cease publication. This part of the offer is likely to be ignored unless TLI membership became much more substantial. People know when they are buying a pig in a poke. > Any assets of LLG (and its mailing lists) remaining after > dissolution are donated to the Institute. The Institute does not > assume LLG's liabilities. I believe that this would be illegal. LLG liabilities must be taken care of before any distribution of assets, else our Board would be liable for legal action comparable to the similar misappropriations that took place during our savings and loan industry scandal of the past few years. Since our liabilities exceed our liquid assets, there would be nothing remaining to donate to TLI. > The energies of the combined Institute will be directed toward the > promulgation of Loglan, as hereinafter described. This after is the goal. > [RAM: Rationale; TLI has existed as an entity much longer than LLG, > is still active with a language which is clearly a direct descendant > of that originally described.] The rationale presumes that a merger of organizations is necessary to merger of the language efforts, which is not the case. If there is a merger, the resulting organization would no doubt have to differ structurally from both existing organizations in substantive ways to gain approval - in such circumstances, what the name of the organization is becomes relatively unimportant. I counter the rationale by noting that, regardless of length of existence, LLG has a much larger membership in the community sense and greater name recognition nationally and internationally through its regular activity on the nets. This name recognition is important to Loglan's success in academia. TLI still bears the stigma of JCB's bureaucrat-bashing when it sought NSF-funding in the late-70s. Meanwhile, LLG has pretty good chances to seek and obtain academic funding in the next year. It is of course our contention that both versions of the language are 'clearly a direct descendant of that originally described'. > 2. The Institute immediately creates a new directorship which it > would be pleased to be filled by Nora LeChevalier, if she desires. As I noted yesterday, Nora is rather more hostile to TLI than she was in 1984, and would likely decline. LLG would insist in any merger on a proportion in all governance structures proportionate with its membership, money/assets contributed, speakers of the language (for roles like the Academy), etc. > The Institute immediately creates a new position in the Academy, to > be filled by John Parks-Clifford, if he so desires. I suspect that he would not so desire, as he also remains highly hostile to JCB, though he suspects that the radicalization of the rest of LLG by the strains of the legal action makes him rather a moderate. More than likely if LLG people were to participate in the Academy, we would insist on the right to choose them, since we know who among us knows the language now a bit better than JCB does. pc, for example, considers himself too rusty for any primary decision-making role. Again, LLG would insist on at least equivalent membership for our people in a post-merger Academy. Of course, we believe that the Academy has no real role to fill - since we are operating quite well by consensus. > The rules of the Academy, which now provide for life tenure and a > veto for each members, would be modified by some combination of (a) > the possibility of removal of members. (b) a specific tenure; > and/or (c) decisions by majority vote. I'm presuming a semi-colon after (a) ... members. We would want the capability for some larger body of members to be able to override the Academy by popular decision. Clarification is needed on how members would be appointed and/or removed. > 3. The Institute's Board passes a resolution expressing its regret > over the schism; welcoming the members of LLG to the Institute; > thanking the members of LLG for their contribution to Loglan; > recognizing the absolutely irreplaceable and vital role of the > founder in the development of Loglan; and expressing its confidence > in the continued success and growth of Loglan. This resolution is > published in Lognet. I'm not sure this kind of resolution is meaningful. It will take deeds to show changes of attitude. > 4. LLG, prior to dissolution, creates a committee to list possible > modifications to Loglan grammar in light of the experiences of LLG > with Lojban. The list will be submitted to the Academy, which will > make a good faith determination which modifications will be adopted > using the same standard as for other proposed changes, with the > exception that the Academy will assign due weight and regard to the > fact that LLG has already explored and adopted the modifications. > This committee also supervises the conversion of Lojban, text, > examples, primers, teaching aids, etc. to Loglan, as appropriate. > Otherwise, the current state of the grammar and vocabulary of Loglan > continues in place This would not be acceptable to our membership. We can perform this exercise, see what the resulting Loglan comes out to be, and try to sell it to the community, but I doubt that anyone who has learned Lojban would buy it. Frankly, we have a lot more people who have learned Lojban, and are actively using it on a day to day or week to week basis than have done so with TLI Loglan. These people will have no interest in giving up what they have learned merely for 'peace', especially if they aren't con- vinced the resulting language is better for the change. JCB has made many decisions on the language justified by what he calls 'relearning cost'. He needs to realize that relearning cost must be multiplied by numbers of people as well. Furthermore, the relearning cost from Lojban to TLI Loglan is higher than the reverse direction. Especially if your grammar change proposal makes TLI Loglan much closer to Lojban, the basic cost of relearning for TLI people is limited to vocabulary, as Lojban is a superset of TLI's language. But with 40% more prims and double the number of LWs, there are many things in Lojban that are actively in use by Lojbanists that do not simply map back to TLI Loglan, and these esoteric uses are increasing month by month because people have started learning them. For example, the perfective tenses added as part of the tense redesign that pc and I did a couple years ago have proven popular and useful, especially in overseas Lojbanists. But there may not be room in the LW space available to TLI Loglan to incorporate this design, so that a morphology change is needed to make more LWs possible, which then changes the equations on how affixes are assigned, etc., etc. I think TLI Loglan CAN evolve to be compatible with Lojban, especially since our rate of change should slow down with book publication this fall. But it will take a long time to adopt changes evolutionarily to the point that the TLI version could be acceptable, and meanwhile the quantity (and quality) Lojban use is literally exploding out of our control. The estimated volume of Lojban text now exceeds 1 Megabyte (actually my archive files run about 3 meg, but include commentary and the like so as to be about a 3 to 1 ratio). I just did an analysis showing that we've had usage of some 2700 Cpxs in actual text on line (and two significant writers have almost none of their stuff on computer), with some of these words being used dozens of times, and 68000 total predicate words (in addition to LWs probably at double that number or more). I get several new pages of text every month (and I doubt that I'm seeing all of it any more). Converting this text to TLI Loglan is probably impossible because it queues up faster than it can be converted. As one example, we have the entire text of the original 'Adventure' computer game translated to Lojban, perhaps 1/3 the length of a paperback book alone in one text. Remember also that we have designs in areas like tense, attitudinals, MEX, letterals, that are several times more elaborate and robust than TLI's design. You can convert TLI design to match ours by straight substitution, but there is no substitution for features not yet a part of the TLI design. Note that any effort to identify proposed changes per this paragraph has to depend on total openness of the TLI design to our people (we of course would be totally open to TLI, but then we already are). There is too much work for one or two people to do to be playing with obsolete information. We cannot tolerate this silly game of trade secrets in a cooperative effort. > , as does its policy regarding licensing, publication, trademark, > copyrights, and royalties. Absolutely unacceptable on all items. As I said above, TLI appears to forget why LLG was founded - specifically to free Loglan from these silly legal constraints that keep people from using the langauge as they see fit. We have been successful BECAUSE we have rejected these policies. And it is not within our capability to trade these policies away, even if any of us wanted to, because we could not bring along anyone except those of us who actually signed the piece of paper. > A committee will be formed to discuss issues in connection with > conversion of public domain LLG materials to Loglan. This presumes it is possible, which it may not be. > 5. LLG, prior to dissolution, will do its utmost, or instruct its > counsel to do his utmost, to vacate the judgment declaring Loglan to > be generic, and will seek to continue to have Loglan registered as a > trademark. The Institute's counsel will assist in this endeavor on > a pro bono basis. [RAM:In view of the judgment of the Appeal Board > this appears to me to be flogging a dead horse. The rationale is > that the combined group would still have an interest in preventing > the adoption of the name by others for inimical purposes.] 1. Inimical is in the eye of the beholder. There is no use of Loglan at this point which is inimical to the language. Indeed, I suspect that someone actually promoting an unrelated language using the name would in effect be merely providing us free publicity. The best way to control the purity of the effort and the design is by massive distribution of correct information, to dwarf any misuses that might take place around the edges. This has worked for Lojban. Even though, for example, Carter continues to work on splinter languages, and a new splinter led by someone named Bruce Gilson, also exists, we have actually been able to capitalize a bit from these efforts, and are stronger in the minds of the conlang community for having the confidence and tolerance to put up with them. 2. It is beyond beating a dead horse. Since the last ruling was on a point of law, it cannot be 'vacated' unless the law is changed. This has not been a civil suit where the parties can simply go off and agree that the issue didn't really matter, because the main party in question here is not TLI or LLG, but The US Patent and Trademark Office, and they cannot violate the law merely because we tell them we don't care anymore. Loglan is generic in nature, and generic it shall remain - there is nothing we could do about it. I suggested a long time ago that TLI could gain a protected name in either of two ways - devising an offshoot of the name Loglan that would be specific to TLI products alone, and creating an independent certification group, perhaps associated with the Academy, with a 'certification mark' that indicates the validity of a product. The latter works better but legally the organization which certifies cannot be a producer or publisher of that which it certifies so it would have to be independent of TLI. > If the LLG Board thinks that there is any likelihood of coming to > terms, based on our respective positions, I would try to attend the > coming Logfest to discuss it further. It doesn't sound like it from the above proposal, but I vaguely suspect that you are aware that the proposal as presented would be still born as a basis for discussion. More productive in deterrmining the value of LogFest attendance would be your own statements (private if necessary) regarding what you think you could take away from a LogFest negotiation and realistically sell to TLI over various tineframes. I'm willing to continue to negotiate via email with you on presenting a package that would be re- spectfully discussed by the members, but the proposal thus far, without some real concessions, will not only fail to bear fruit, but will further serve to radicalize the community into believing that negotiation with TLI is a waste of time. > With respect to your proposal A, fourth paragraph, I would support > an arrangement, if no agreement is reached, for each side to make a > presentation, said presentations to be sent to all members of LLG > and TLI, and a vote taken on merger, which, to succeed, would > require a majority of both groups independently. This one paragraph is the main reason I suspect that you realize what is really necessary, assuming that you mean what I interpret this as saying. It is probably the only realistic way to affect a reconciliation where some or both groups have to make real concessions - the people who have to make the sacrifices should be the ones to decide what concessions they are willing to accept. If 'merger' is talking about organizations only, this won't be enough. If 'members of TLI' includes only voting members, and not all dues- paying members, it would be a waste of time, since JCB and Jenny are I believe a majority in and of themselves. If all dues-paying members of TLI, and all JL subscribers have the right to vote and we are talking about a majority of both groups who respond and express their vote within some fixed timeframe, we can probably work towards something like this. I would envision that we would make a proposal with TLI making a response, and TLI making a proposal with LLG making a response. Each membership votes on both proposals at once. If one proposal gets a majority in both groups, it is adopted, and if both proposals get a majority in both groups, the higher percentage vote determines the winning proposal. We might actually want a 2/3 vote rather than a majority to be sure that the community is truly behind a plan to be adopted. I now roughly outline the plan I would attempt to sell to the TLI membership. If part or all of this can be agreed upon by TLI without a vote it is probably salable to our membership. 0. The two organizations agree in principle to submit the matter to the members. The existence and steps of the plan will be immediately made public. 1. Interchange of information. The two groups agree to fully share all available design information with each other to ensure that any decisions made regarding the language merger. This information includes not only active design, but pending design change proposals that are under serious condition as well. Parties agree to that the intellectual property claims of the other organization will be respected with regard to any materials exchanged under this interchange, with policies towards materials obtained independently not covered by this agreement. Even if no merger takes place, this is in the best interest of both organizations, since we will know that the other organization has available correct data rather than incorrect data in making statements about each other's design internally or publicly. [Thus for example, our shortly forthcoming book will have a list of TLI Loglan prims and LWs and the corresponding values in Lojban. This will be there whether or not an agreement takes place. It is in both organizations' interest that the information we publish in this book be accurate, since it then renders TLI materials of more potential resource value for users of the book. It is thus urged that intellectual property claims not forbid such dissemination of correct information in place of publically available but incorrect information.] Information will be shared as fully as possible, and certain designated persons in each organization will be accessible to the other party to answer questions about the content and interpretation of materials. Such contact point will endeavor to speak authoritatively in response to such questions, and both organizations will support their spokesperson in providing the most accurate information. I would envision you and John Cowan as initial key spokespeople, in your respective roles as chief grammarians. 2. Writing system interoperability will be designed. Each organization will adopt an alternative orthography for writing its version of the language that is compatible with the other language version's writing system. Cowan's alternative orthography for Lojban is our first cut at the Lojban side of this. Neither side commits to using the alternative, but it is made available to people in the other group who are uncomfortable with the regular writing system. Each side will develop a basic software capability to convert plain ASCII text from one writing system to the other. 3. Morphological interoperability - Both versions' regular and alternative writing system shall incorporate some symbolic representation that is capable of visually and unambiguously expressing features found in the other version's morphology should they be adopted as part of merger efforts. 4. Word mapping - A definitive mapping of prims and LWS in each version to corresponding ones in the other version will be prepared, with notes on semantic differences where identified. Corresponding conventions on Cpx-making will similarly be identified where possible (i.e. we should be able to provide you with sets of usable Lojban equivalents for your Cpxs ending with madzo, to allow a TLI Loglanist to easily know how to substitute the correct Lojban word in a Lojban version of their text. Note that the biggest complication in this is incompatibility of prim place structures. This will be a tough problem to solve at this stage. 5. Either or both organizations will prepare what they see as a set of discrete differences between the two language morphologies and grammars. These differences will be divided into 1) enhancements/restrictions to the formal algorithm or YACC grammar of a feature; 2) addition or omission of a small feature such as a LW, supporting a selma'o/lexeme within a feature; 3) changes within the structure of a feature (e.g. differing priority of grouping etc.) The other organization will consider and respond regarding each difference as a proposed change, indicating whether it a) would be adopted willingly without membership approval, b) could feasibly be adopted with membership approval (whether it technically can work in the other version, as opposed to actually being acceptable), or c) total incompatibility which would require an either/or language version choice by the members. Ideally, no differences would end up in the last group. 6. If all differences turn out to be 5-a) adoptable, then the only incompatibility in the language versions is in vocabulary. If all changes in 5-b) are enhancements/additions in one direction or the other [5-1), and 5-2)], then each language version is upward compatible to the other in all features, and can be made compatible except for vocabulary by members vote. If 5-c) incompatibilities exist, then the only possible resolutions are to immediately choose one language version over the other, or to go our separate ways with one or both language versions eventually dying out. A 4th possibility exists as the exception to the last three cases. All of the steps leading to the determination of which condition exists per these four will be completed as quickly as possible, ideally within 3 months, and definitely within 6 months. The efforts will be accorded highest priority until completed. 7. Given the information from 1-6) one or both organizations will prepare proposals for submission to the members of both groups, with supporting information indicating the general nature of the change, and the reasons why approval is desired. If the other side is opposed, they may give reasons either general or specific. The package of detailed supporting information will be made available to all voters upon request. The exact mechanics of voting are negotiable, as long as it is reasonably assured that the voting will be honest, and completed wothin a reasonably short time by both groups. 8. LLG's proposal to the TLI membership would likely be from among the following: a) if the differences reduce to vocabulary changes only after adoption of willing changes, we will ask the TLI membership to adopt the vocabulary change to Lojban's as a new standard for Loglan, with the proviso that LLG would support people indefinitely using the older vocabulary by making available software to perform vocabulary and or- thography replacement. We would also make this software available to TLI, and would expect that either group would therefore accept text for publication written in either vocabulary set. b) if the differences reduce to vocabulary only after adoption of some grammar changes requiring member approval, we will seek such approval plus the vocabulary change to the Lojban vocabulary, offering support per a) for people continuing to use the old vocabulary. c) If the language versions are partially or totally incompatible, we will seek adoption of the current (possibly modified) Lojban as the new standard Loglan. d) if the 4th condition per 6 entails, we will present a proposal along the lines of the above. LLG will include in these proposals the commitment to produce and provide compatible data files for MacTeach and other software, and will pay for the free distribution of these data files to all bona fide owners of said software. It will release rights to said data files to TLI after such distribution. At its discretion, LLG might also offer a free or non-profit distribution of other information supporting the conversion to the modified software to LLG members holding certain appropriate products. For example, a set of Lojban equivalent examples and a tape for each example in L1 would be prepared and made available at minimum prices to current owners of L1. LLG would consider making TLI a licensed distributor of all LLG products to its membership, offering equal to its largest discount to any customers, so that TLI could gain from retail sale of wholesale purchased products. LLG would also negotiate to aid TLI in producing updates to TLI materials compatible with the changed language, with allocation of costs and rights to be determined. LLG would not seek to have undue con- trol over, or gain significant profit from any aid it gives TLI in converting to a member-approved common language. In short, LLG will be willing to undertake considerable commitment and expense to minimize the transition for members most affected if its proposal is adopted. 10. While these substantive language issues are being settled, LLG and TLI could negotiate on organizational and policy differences. It is unlikely that the most basic differences can be resolved till we know what language version(s) will survive. The nature of the cooperation that takes place in resolving the language question will largely determine LLG's attitude towards further steps involving organizational cooperation. 11. Any agreement will be made with the essential recognition that time is critical. LLG is in the process of preparing several books setting forth the Lojban design in far greater depth than TLI has ever provided for its versions. The first will be a dictionary/grammar reference that will substantially commit us to the current Lojban trial baseline that will come into being with that publication (expected within a few months). We will not significantly hold up production for mere possibilities of resolution of differences. Later books will be based on that initial book baseline, so that with passing time, negotiability of language issues will dwindle very rapidly. Because I will be fully engaged in book production, as well as dealing with surgery for Nora, learning Russian and adopting children from Russia, and probably preparing research plans and funding proposals supporting the bilingual raising of our children as Lojban speakers (we have identified a likely research associate who leads a group researching child language learning). I will probably delegate much of the above language difference resolution to Cowan and others. The following is my clarificational response to some questions raised by McIvor in response to the preceding. > a) You and I both know that we are wasting our time if either of us > thinks that a combined language is going to be principally Lojban or > Loglan. As I said, it is either principly one or principly the other, or we start over again from scratch (or maybe come up with a Solomon-like half- way measure that manages to be both while being neither more than the other. LLG people are probably more resistant to any changes than TLI people, since one of our starting principles has been the need for baselines and a cessation to change. TLI has a principle, indeed a com- mitment from JCB at the end of L1, that his version of the language will continue to change, hence TLI people should not be adverse to such a change if well-studied to be sure it is good, that happens to bring the TLI version into conformance with Lojban. Whether you label it Lojban is up to you - Lojban is merely 'Logical Language' as a name in the langauge, and there are other ways to make the name that would be slightly different, if name is the issue. > b) If there is hostility to TLI in LLG and vice versa, it is because > of unflattering remarks made by top brass in both camps to their > members. If we, in both camps, think we could sell our respective > languages to the members of the other camp, surely it is not beyond > our capacities, given the will, of selling a combined language to > both as well. Our main selling point to TLI people AND to our own is that we have a working community using the language and a body of text (and 1000 pages of Ju'i Lobypli, etc.). The same could not be claimed of a hybrid. This is not to say that it couldn't be sold, but the task is not as easy. Reaching a peace by punishing both sides is not necessarily productive. > c) Re relative strengths. I note that LK was printed in 475 copies. > I imagine you have a few spares, Actually, we print just what we think we will need for the issue, plus spares to cover new people for the next 3 months or so. We overrun JL and LK by less than 25 in any case, since I get full price discount from my current printer for 25 or more copies and there is no need to overrun more than that therefore. > and quite a few of these go to people like myself that are not > active in Loglan. YOU aren't active in Loglan???? Actually, by definition LK goes to people who are 'not active', but who have expressed interest in being kept informed. We have another 200 who have asked to know when the books are done, but don't want us to bother with news until then, and the 250 now being cut to 115 getting JL, all of whom expressed interest at some time in more detailed info about the language, usually with intent to learn it now or later. Some of the remaining 135 being cut are still interested but cannot afford it, etc., so the new figure understates the actual interest. > You also state in LK that 66 people have requested subscriptions to > JL, of which half are in arrears. Both these numbers are well under > those claimed in your proposal to TLI. I also note that some 80 > people are on the Lojban net, of which all but a dozen or so are > "lurkers". These numbers are not far different from TLI numbers. I > note also that only 4 people (at least in one area) are capable of > relatively fluent conversation on Lojban, and with only 3, you are > incapable of sustaining a conversational learning group. Admittedly > this may be 3 or 4 more that we could turn up in TLI, but the > numbers are not impressive. Our numbers are not overwhelming, I agree. But the people in our top tier are a major notch ahead of most people in TLI. I consider it quite likely that Cowan, myself, Nora, and probably Nick Nicholas in Australia all know Loglan better than JCB ever did, and the first three of us can even read and probably write TLI Loglan text without any difficulty with a word list handy (Nora and I sometimes without; we are still intermittently plagued by crossover words that we remember from our TLI days, hence we actively work to avoid exposing ourself to TLI text, which tends to cause corresponding Lojban errors for the next week or two.) > I haven't seen the latest LogFlash, but MacTeach, in both Mac and > IBM versions has had automatic statistics gathering from the > beginning, as well as the ability to accept alternatively correct > English (and in E-L direction, Loglan expressions, such as for > instance, redundant ga's, though there is no limit, except human > ability to guess what correct alternatives might be used by the > learner. TLI also has a good supply of printed books, is about to > issue an on-line dictionary, and has a learning manual about > complete. We don't have the alternatively correct English, partly because we know we can't guess the user's alternative choices. We allow the user to change the English keywords for any word, but there must be a caution to avoid ending up with a duplicate (we had to work hard to prevent duplicates, or words that might mean to different Lojban words; e.g 'fly' the insect and 'fly' the verb). Since we don't have a grammar teacher, we haven't faced that problem yet. As I said, I found MacTeach grammar teacher to be frustratingly easy to break. Except for LogFlash, we are trying to move away from CAI programs that rely on trying to guess what the user will answer. > Financially, I would say that LLG seems to be in worse shape than > TLI. Again, mostly from the legal fees. Also, Nora and I are not nearly as wealthy as JCB and cannot spend what he has lightly to make us instantly in good shape. WE also far more rigidly keep our books separate from our own finances (I recall that TLI finances work out of JCB's register in his savings account, which is probably illegal as well as making sure that TLI never truly is bankrupt as long as JCB isn't.) The financial difficultires we mostly face came from trying to grow too quickly and not insisting on payment from so many of the new people. Science fiction fandom is noteworthy for always being broke and taking advantage of people whp let them. We took a while to learn this. As we prune our list, we will become much closer to being on a paying basis. But remember also that in JL we put out a magazine much bigger than TLIs' (about as much text as a paperback book each issue) while charging about the same as TLI does. > In the proposal I sent, TLI did not expect to receive any material > assets from LLG, and, were the proposal accepted, naturally you > would be obligated to offer refunds to members who had not yet > received full value for their contribution. The business about > turning over assets to TLI was a legalism, since I understand when a > non-profit organization disbands, any residual assets must be turned > over to another non-profit organization. The assets we would > receive from LLG, were such a fusion to occur, would be its members > that decided to stay on, a not inconsiderable asset. At $25 per year for only Lognet, not many would stay on. In effect TLI dues are pure donation, with Lognet being more comparable to LK than JL in cost to produce - we consider it a loss leader (at 10% payment rates, we have to), and it doesn't cost much. But we have only a few dozen people who have donated an average of $25/year on top of the non- profit publications. If we sold more stuff to make a profit (as we will with the books), our assets would be much better, but then our sales would be lower, as TLI's are. > As for the Academy, whether one calls it that or not, it seems to me > that Lojban does not poll its entire membership for deciding > baseline change, and the very fact that there is a baselined Lojban > presumes baseliners. In order to fulfil the aims stated for > Loglan/Lojban, a controlled structure is necessary. Agreed, more or less. We do on many issues in effect poll the whole membership, but rather in the manner you did in the much decried prim declensions. Our philosophy is the key difference. JCB considers the academy to be a judiciary removed from the community (and has so stated - I for example would never be qualified for the academy regardless of my skill in the language because "I do not have a judicial temperament", (as if he were competent to judge %^)). We consider the group reviewing a change to be representative of the community, and indeed include as many as is practical given the significance of the particular issue. Most important, we DO NOT turn away anyone who asks to participate on an issue. We rely on the recognition by the community that some people know areas of the language better than others and are listened to, but that confidence is something NEVER assumed or taken for granted. If people think I'm wrong, I get outvoted (and it happens often) - my political skill is that I know how often I can make a bad decision they must overrule without having people stop believing in my ability, while on the other hand, I know how to fight unimportant battles that I can and do lose so that people know they CAN override me when I'm wrong, hence have confidence that they still have ultimate power, while still having the ability to carry the day when I think it truly important. We both agree that stability is needed. That is why we have baselines, which TLI does not have. But we also recognize that at some point the language will and must pass out of our control. The metaphor of the Academy suggests that of the French Academy which is respected by the people at the same time it is ignored, but is decried by linguists everywhere. We need a formal change mechanism, but it has to seem as in- formal as possible to have the desired influence. Anything that smacks of elitism is political death to our group. > Your views on openness are probably shared by many on our side. Good. > I would welcome mutual discussion on the problem raised by Colin > Fine, if, in fact it impacts on Loglan/Lojban grammar. Cowan just posted that he thinks the problem was a misunderstanding for the most part - he is going to investigate one possible change in the priority of constructs within arguments (which would probably have a parallel within TLI's grammar). We can keep you informed, and indeed at some point, I will ship you the pending list of changes to the baselined grammar I sent you, most of which are noise level tunings. > I also think, if our languages go their separate ways, as may likely > be the case, a mutual intertranslation project would still be > worthwhile. Since some proposed applications presume some sort of > Natural-language-Loglan mechanically-assisted translation, a first > stage might well be a Lojban-Loglan, Loglan-Lojban translation, > since both are stated to have unambiguous grammars, which differ in > some important details. This is true, but difficult to get funding for from outside, and insufficiently interesting to people inside unless it stands to win people over. In short, it would never rate enough priority to get anywhere. Too many books to write. > My suggestion about pitches to each others membership and voting > presumed all JL and Lognet-receiving members could vote, i.e. those > actually contributing to the language. Good. Message-Id: <199208141258.AA00394@munagin.ee.mu.OZ.AU> To: Mauro.Tauzzi@f608.n333.z2.fidonet.org Subject: Lojxban kaj ceteraj planlingvoj Date: Fri, 14 Aug 92 22:58:46 +1000 Kara samideano, mi ricevis kopie de Bob LeChevalier vian leteron esprimantan scivolemon pri lojxban kaj aliaj planlingvoj; LeChevalier kopiigis la leteron al mi, pro ke li mem ne konas Esperanton :) En cxia kazo, mi scivolas kaj Esperanton (kiel vi probable jxus konstatas :) , kaj lojxbanon (pli-malpli --- sed cxiam temas pri "pli-malpli" cxe lingvo tiel kompleksa, kiel lojxban :) --- kaj mi havas intereson en unu-du aliaj planlingvoj. Mi estas preta respondi al eventualaj viaj demandoj, kaj rekomendas ke, kiel enkondukon, vi legu la lojxban- brosxuron, kiun mi kaj kolego Mark Shoulson enesperantigis (gxi haveblas de la Planlingva servilo --- sendu mesaxgon "send lojban lojbroch-e-o.tex" al adreso langserv@hebrew.cc.columbia.edu. Mi esperas, ke vi trovos Lojxbanon bona distro :), kaj salutas