From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Sun Dec 08 15:39:22 2002 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 08 Dec 2002 15:39:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from rlpowell by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18LB14-0007y6-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 15:39:18 -0800 Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 15:39:18 -0800 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Baseline policy voting - semiofficial results Message-ID: <20021208233918.GG26904@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021208175649.00a997a0@pop.east.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021208175649.00a997a0@pop.east.cox.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i From: Robin Lee Powell X-archive-position: 3327 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Sun, Dec 08, 2002 at 05:59:28PM -0500, Bob LeChevalier-Logical Language Group wrote: > Here is the result of the baseline policy statement voting. > > I'm asking Robin Powell to check the baselinevote balloting to make > sure I didn't miss anyone, and to indicate any disagreement as to how > someone voted (a couple of people did not write a simple "yes" or > "no"; if Robin disagrees with me on how someone voted, the vote gets > tossed.) > > > From baselinevote@lojban.org (subject to verification by Robin Powell) > > YES > Check. > Check. > Check, but arguably slightly unclear. What he *actually* says is: "I support the idea of a baseline. Having a stable dictionary and learning materials should help Lojban increase its user base. I'm far from proficient in the language." And some other stuff that is irrelevant. As the apparent official ratifier, I accept this as a yes vote. > Check. > Check. > Check. > Check. > Check. > Check. (Big shocker there. 8) > Check. > Check. > Check. > Check. > Check. > Check. (Duh.) > Check. > Check. > Check. > Check. > Check. > Check. > =redist-lojban@lothar.com Check. > Check. > Check. *MISSING*: YES: > NO > Check. > Check, but slightly arguable. To wit, he says: "My vote will remain nay until the lojban-Loglan schism is addressed explicitly in some fashion in the baseline policy statement.". Given that a draft is being worked on to address this issue, I wonder is Steve wouldn't like to reconsider. > Unofficial vote results (pending verification by Robin) > 44 yes > 4 no > > The baseline policy is ratified. With bells on. -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** I'm a *male* Robin. .i le pamoi velru'e zo'u jmaji le plibu taxfu .i le remoi velru'e zo'u mo .i le cimoi velru'e zo'u ba'e prali .uisai http://www.lojban.org/ *** to sa'a cu'u lei pibyta'u cridrnoma toi