Received: from localhost ([::1]:50038 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1agywA-0007zR-Kx; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 11:15:50 -0700 Received: from mail-vk0-f50.google.com ([209.85.213.50]:35691) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1agyw4-0007zF-GD for llg-members@lojban.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 11:15:48 -0700 Received: by mail-vk0-f50.google.com with SMTP id e6so151509663vkh.2 for ; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 11:15:44 -0700 (PDT) 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; bh=iGxYg1+38/5HmaIE0t9s/EbtvlsqHxI0mGxmce+SdLw=; b=yBwcbc2M9ljD7Ca+qArTmfnT+eJnlI42MJ3aDj4dh7aTh+5IUIBEOYtTVEpsIjjwX3 R0WWlw3u2QLjOuV+AR8Rl/oOZjL710IayixtYi4YwS/4u01eTlmXZboyZgvh3VM9C8Y9 6Pbdiz17Zh4Wmt7DbNkhkg6+b2g2XSH4pYVw/GKAqEnkamytOzS7fQQT9Ian232pQuFT fXStnmbHZxYQtw9oUzHwopbXgMrDHRByTokr8CzwKosMvY53oS9RkmJ5ynAGt81ejKqL 9rwNlQQoqbxk5zuRv2QoprRIw5czysogQd8ps6+0hlo6nBWLAJfp6UruPCn40zCCvw1D AavQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to; bh=iGxYg1+38/5HmaIE0t9s/EbtvlsqHxI0mGxmce+SdLw=; b=CjiL5SjegW3jfW/V+VkCWDI5ugpgM/Fe131cSFGw1/XAsiFjNMj2xJFrc9ZiR8TjhM b6/muWNy2sGR/TT8LYZrN9dJ1eYGYpmI9ASFggRjjCAkO3/p5bcwsteQxDZsWUOddd+t ceeD+czkXgX+6S2rxqUXfXRI3QeZPcEhRBlCxS2cv/LjUNd4he9c61iwn+LIaJ6LrMxB b/be6JFoXBwqYWGK5zunqlH3Cf33GL0BktiA1vH2gd6SeACZfJtydf0tVHGPRzSXIaA7 TRZNv14PObadWtRqioH+ajviuu7IDgHRGeU0NQIlTaFPKrrP7M/Y5FirquQY2kvMmLUN do1Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJJf5fkvmfiaGUYYSIAKuutpYnShCCOXwx9b91mj0FCqbGrL8W9WEZ8yBKN7X2xgLn1R1yq6X5uLlLzKsA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.31.170.196 with SMTP id t187mr18338208vke.66.1458324938465; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 11:15:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.159.38.135 with HTTP; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 11:15:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.159.38.135 with HTTP; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 11:15:38 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <8BCCD0E2-E6D4-4687-9D89-D177E69E1259@gmail.com> <56DE1D83.8050901@lojban.org> <8EC7FC36-8C8F-43FD-AE6A-C704D1D9C2CE@gmail.com> <12678381.nPyR9sEY1K@caracal> <56E0AE11.8020708@lojban.org> <56E1F54E.3040501@lojban.org> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 14:15:38 -0400 Message-ID: From: Curtis Franks To: llg-members@lojban.org X-Spam-Score: -2.0 (--) X-Spam_score: -2.0 X-Spam_score_int: -19 X-Spam_bar: -- Subject: Re: [Llg-members] 2015 Annual Meeting - Old Business X-BeenThere: llg-members@lojban.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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="===============3946486305020925431==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============3946486305020925431== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114325ececf54d052e56bba1 --001a114325ececf54d052e56bba1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mar 18, 2016 10:26, "Riley Martinez-Lynch" wrote: > > Since we may now vote to affirm BPFK=E2=80=99s findings on =E2=80=9Cdotsi= de=E2=80=9D, I move that we do so. Curtis, would you like to second? > > I=E2=80=99m referring specifically to BPFK=E2=80=99s clarification of the= rules for cmevla: > > https://mw.lojban.org/papri/BPFK_Section:_cmevla > > "All cmevla must begin and end with a pause or glottal stop, regardless of grammatical context. The syllables la, lai, la'i and doi are no longer subject to special restrictions inside cmevla.=E2=80=9D > > If the chair of BPFK would accept re-appointment to that position, I would also like ask that we vote to recognize his leadership for another term. I am personally grateful for his work in bringing people together over the last year, and for achieving the long-discussed goal of holding deliberations in lojban. > I vote in favor to this motion too. The work done has been impressive, necessary, and long-desired. I am excited to see the progress that another year may bring and look forward to collaborating with him and the BPFK body in general. > Once that business is on the way, I=E2=80=99d like to share a few ideas a= bout the idea of sustaining membership. But I think that may be a longer, meeting-spanning discussion, and these two items =E2=80=93 recognizing the = BPFK=E2=80=99s work, and reauthorizing its chair =E2=80=93 need to happen now. > > =E2=80=94Riley > > > On Mar 10, 2016, at 5:29 PM, Bob LeChevalier wrote: > > > > We are now into Old Business. Known old business topics include > > A) BPFK status, goals, and reappointing (or not) the BPFK jatna > > B) partly subsidiary to that is the republication of CLL, both the Robin edition (anyone know the current status?) and whatever the next version is after that. This issue was raised with respect to the github repository. > > C) the effort led nominally by Pierre to set up some sort of skills testing for Lojbanists > > D) we've never done anything about it, but we still have the possibility, now authorized in the bylaws, to establish "sustaining" memberships (nonvoting) to gain some additional funding. Of course, we need to find something worth spending the money on - nothing has been high enough priority so far. (There will be some new proposals under New Business that could cost more money than we currently take in.) > > > > > > For the first two topics, I personally would like the jatna's take on: > > 1) whether the PEG grammar or the YACC grammar is the official/baseline one right now. > > 2) What, if any, parser is considered official, or at least compliant with whatever the official grammar is. > > 3) As I've previously noted, it seems that what used to be the baselined (and thus not changing) gismu and cmavo lists have been replaced by new lists which include a whole lot of new stuff, possibly experimental (but there is no defined experimental space for gismu). It seems that to some people, a large number of experimental cmavo have become part of their standard dialect. Does byfy have a plan for addressing these proposals/changes and deciding that some are officially approved (and therefore need to be documented in CLL and on the BYFY cmavo pages). > > 4) the jatna said that there were 8 byfy members, including And. Who are the others and how were/are they determined (in case someone wants to join)? I know for example that I am still on the byfy list and never resigned. But I also make no attempt to keep up with the business, which is entirely in Lojban. Though I probably could read a single message if I felt it important enough, I doubt that I have the time/interest to keep up with the discussion. So am I one of the 8, but always abstaining? > > 5) Does producing a published dictionary fit anywhere in the byfy plans, or is this an LLG project relatively independent of the byfy (the answer to 3) above is relevant, and I think that byfy would need to produce real dictionary definitions of the cmavo to at least replace those found in the old cmavo list - this was after all one of the original reasons for setting up the BPFK - because I couldn't come up with good definitions and the dictionary was never published as a result.) > > > > The floor is open for discussion of these topics and/or other things that might be considered Old Business (discussed in previous meetings being the key factor). Please use subject lines to keep things straight if multiple topics are being discussed. > > > > Motions, including a motion to reappoint/confirm the jatna until the next meeting, and to officially ratify the byfy approval of "dotside", are in order. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Llg-members mailing list > > Llg-members@lojban.org > > http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members > > > _______________________________________________ > Llg-members mailing list > Llg-members@lojban.org > http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members --001a114325ececf54d052e56bba1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Mar 18, 2016 10:26, "Riley Martinez-Lynch" <shunpiker@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Since we may now vote to affirm BPFK=E2=80=99s findings on =E2=80=9Cdo= tside=E2=80=9D, I move that we do so. Curtis, would you like to second?
>
> I=E2=80=99m referring specifically to BPFK=E2=80=99s clarification of = the rules for cmevla:
>
> https://m= w.lojban.org/papri/BPFK_Section:_cmevla
>
> "All cmevla must begin and end with a pause or glottal stop, rega= rdless of grammatical context. The syllables la, lai, la'i and doi are = no longer subject to special restrictions inside cmevla.=E2=80=9D
>
> If the chair of BPFK would accept re-appointment to that position, I w= ould also like ask that we vote to recognize his leadership for another ter= m. I am personally grateful for his work in bringing people together over t= he last year, and for achieving the long-discussed goal of holding delibera= tions in lojban.
>

I vote in favor to this motion too. The work done has been i= mpressive, necessary, and long-desired. I am excited to see the progress th= at another year may bring and look forward to collaborating with him and th= e BPFK body in general.

> Once that business is on the way, I=E2=80=99d like to s= hare a few ideas about the idea of sustaining membership. But I think that = may be a longer, meeting-spanning discussion, and these two items =E2=80=93= recognizing the BPFK=E2=80=99s work, and reauthorizing its chair =E2=80=93= need to happen now.
>
> =E2=80=94Riley
>
> > On Mar 10, 2016, at 5:29 PM, Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
> >
> > We are now into Old Business.=C2=A0 Known old business topics inc= lude
> > A) BPFK status, goals, and reappointing (or not) the BPFK jatna > > B) partly subsidiary to that is the republication of CLL, both th= e Robin edition (anyone know the current status?) and whatever the next ver= sion is after that.=C2=A0 This issue was raised with respect to the github = repository.
> > C) the effort led nominally by Pierre to set up some sort of skil= ls testing for Lojbanists
> > D) we've never done anything about it, but we still have the = possibility, now authorized in the bylaws, to establish "sustaining&qu= ot; memberships (nonvoting) to gain some additional funding.=C2=A0 Of cours= e, we need to find something worth spending the money on - nothing has been= high enough priority so far.=C2=A0 (There will be some new proposals under= New Business that could cost more money than we currently take in.)
> >
> >
> > For the first two topics, I personally would like the jatna's= take on:
> > 1) whether the PEG grammar or the YACC grammar is the official/ba= seline one right now.
> > 2) What, if any, parser is considered official, or at least compl= iant with whatever the official grammar is.
> > 3) As I've previously noted, it seems that what used to be th= e baselined (and thus not changing) gismu and cmavo lists have been replace= d by new lists which include a whole lot of new stuff, possibly experimenta= l (but there is no defined experimental space for gismu).=C2=A0 It seems th= at to some people, a large number of experimental cmavo have become part of= their standard dialect.=C2=A0 Does byfy have a plan for addressing these p= roposals/changes and deciding that some are officially approved (and theref= ore need to be documented in CLL and on the BYFY cmavo pages).
> > 4) the jatna said that there were 8 byfy members, including And.= =C2=A0 Who are the others and how were/are they determined (in case someone= wants to join)?=C2=A0 I know for example that I am still on the byfy list = and never resigned.=C2=A0 But I also make no attempt to keep up with the bu= siness, which is entirely in Lojban.=C2=A0 Though I probably could read a s= ingle message if I felt it important enough, I doubt that I have the time/i= nterest to keep up with the discussion.=C2=A0 So am I one of the 8, but alw= ays abstaining?
> > 5) Does producing a published dictionary fit anywhere in the byfy= plans, or is this an LLG project relatively independent of the byfy (the a= nswer to 3) above is relevant, and I think that byfy would need to produce = real dictionary definitions of the cmavo to at least replace those found in= the old cmavo list - this was after all one of the original reasons for se= tting up the BPFK - because I couldn't come up with good definitions an= d the dictionary was never published as a result.)
> >
> > The floor is open for discussion of these topics and/or other thi= ngs that might be considered Old Business (discussed in previous meetings b= eing the key factor).=C2=A0 Please use subject lines to keep things straigh= t if multiple topics are being discussed.
> >
> > Motions, including a motion to reappoint/confirm the jatna until = the next meeting, and to officially ratify the byfy approval of "dotsi= de", are in order.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Llg-members mailing list
> > Llg-members@lojban.org<= /a>
> > h= ttp://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Llg-members mailing list
> Llg-members@lojban.org > http:/= /mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members

--001a114325ececf54d052e56bba1-- --===============3946486305020925431== 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 --===============3946486305020925431==--