Received: from localhost ([::1]:33099 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1YAJSA-0000tI-1R; Sun, 11 Jan 2015 06:25:18 -0800 Received: from mail-ig0-f169.google.com ([209.85.213.169]:57080) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1YAJS6-0000t6-4D for llg-members@lojban.org; Sun, 11 Jan 2015 06:25:15 -0800 Received: by mail-ig0-f169.google.com with SMTP id z20so8104607igj.0 for ; Sun, 11 Jan 2015 06:25:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=9h0Lmt3AhvxCkViERGSC1riNXiX9RKR93C6/gr3DLRk=; b=qsM7iD8ebwFCFsL+UhuECDCd8A/0sA7eFnhoeav7cDgaS1Bxk8hsl+dz9HSxcqiR62 Wb6VGpCrLsRWy+32B2+j5ChX6l6H2eVOOe4ku6DE6xYrSPCRk/DnBwsJ3UPMcNBsrDXp GTkkJD349OvZOyldicyM9ebgz+r83QGQwiGkJbenxBLSFT+rmApPPy3arO8r3LQhykv8 FWy9HXn+4ef+opAF3neFlhIj8j9mfDNHVCsKUJEX955CnevRLZ54qBCfgF4h3npalm8C /VRQV+A/1zgwlwj25+eNm2LiezaKHJNZOf7FLauMMPmdLraA0Kdf4v6XYZ7ujPdG0hQl YFBA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.107.133.142 with SMTP id p14mr24044993ioi.6.1420986307953; Sun, 11 Jan 2015 06:25:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.107.8.198 with HTTP; Sun, 11 Jan 2015 06:25:07 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <54B1D51C.4070908@lojban.org> References: <54B146BE.3030503@lojban.org> <54B1D51C.4070908@lojban.org> Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2015 09:25:07 -0500 Message-ID: From: Matt Arnold To: llg-members@lojban.org X-Spam-Score: 0.7 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.7 X-Spam_score_int: 7 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.digitalkingdom.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Arg. Why can't you? Fine. $2000. Let the record show, for the umpteenth time, that I regard parlaimentary procedure as a dumb waste of our time. Stack all the time Lojbanists spend splitting hairs like this in formal organizations, and stack it next to all the time being spent on advancing the Lojban project. It's so out of proportion, as to be unnecessary. Individuals should hang out in the IRC channel asking people what they want. Then each individual should just do what have learned to be the obvious will of the community. But if you're going to make us play this game, then I'll go along with it. It is the absolute worst game I know. [...] Content analysis details: (0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: lojban.org] 2.7 DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL RBL: Envelope sender listed in dnsbl.ahbl.org [listed in gmail.com.rhsbl.ahbl.org. IN] [A] -0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3 RBL: Good reputation (+3) [209.85.213.169 listed in wl.mailspike.net] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (matt.mattarn[at]gmail.com) 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL Mailspike good senders Subject: Re: [Llg-members] CLL republication - continuation of the meeting X-BeenThere: llg-members@lojban.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: llg-members@lojban.org Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3050029128959697070==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============3050029128959697070== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113ecfc41dce1c050c6128a9 --001a113ecfc41dce1c050c6128a9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Arg. Why can't you? Fine. $2000. Let the record show, for the umpteenth time, that I regard parlaimentary procedure as a dumb waste of our time. Stack all the time Lojbanists spend splitting hairs like this in formal organizations, and stack it next to all the time being spent on advancing the Lojban project. It's so out of proportion, as to be unnecessary. Individuals should hang out in the IRC channel asking people what they want. Then each individual should just do what have learned to be the obvious will of the community. But if you're going to make us play this game, then I'll go along with it. It is the absolute worst game I know. -Matt A On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 8:42 PM, Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG wrote: > On 1/10/2015 4:51 PM, Matt Arnold wrote: > >> > Could someone make a motion indicating >> >>> 1) a vote of confidence in Robin's decision-making with respect to the >>> process of CLL republication (CLL 1.1), including those items that he asked >>> about >>> 2) authorizing expenditures up to some maximum by Robin or his >>> delegatees for such republication, without need for approval of each such >>> expenditure, up to some >>> specified limit (I suggest $1000 to $2000 based on Robin's report), with >>> a final report of such expenditures submitted to the Board. >>> >> >> I so move. -Eppcott >> > > Please specify an amount for the limit. > > > lojbab > > > _______________________________________________ > Llg-members mailing list > Llg-members@lojban.org > http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members > --001a113ecfc41dce1c050c6128a9 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Arg. Why can't you? Fine. $2000. Let the record show, = for the umpteenth time, that I regard parlaimentary procedure as a dumb was= te of our time. Stack all the time=C2=A0Lojbanists spend splitting hairs li= ke this in formal organizations, and stack it next to all the time being sp= ent=C2=A0on advancing the Lojban project. It's so out of proportion, as= to be unnecessary. Individuals should hang out in the IRC channel asking p= eople what they want. Then each individual should just do what have learned= to be the obvious will of the community. But if you're going to make u= s play this game, then I'll go along with it. It is the absolute worst = game I know.=C2=A0

-Matt A


On Sat, J= an 10, 2015 at 8:42 PM, Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG <lojb= ab@lojban.org> wrote:
On 1/10/2015 4:51 PM, Matt Arnold wrote:
=C2=A0> Could someone make a motion indicating
1) a vote of confidence in Robin's decision-making with respect to the = process of CLL republication (CLL 1.1), including those items that he asked= about
2) authorizing expenditures up to some maximum by Robin or his delegatees f= or such republication, without need for approval of each such expenditure, = up to some
specified limit (I suggest $1000 to $2000 based on Robin's report), wit= h a final report of such expenditures submitted to the Board.

I so move. -Eppcott

Please specify an amount for the limit.


lojbab


_______________________________________________
Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@loj= ban.org
http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members

--001a113ecfc41dce1c050c6128a9-- --===============3050029128959697070== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Llg-members mailing list Llg-members@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members --===============3050029128959697070==--