Received: from localhost ([::1]:49348 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1auxvo-0001jf-2f; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 01:01:16 -0700 Received: from mail-lf0-f46.google.com ([209.85.215.46]:33119) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1auxvg-0001Pf-7N for llg-members@lojban.org; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 01:01:14 -0700 Received: by mail-lf0-f46.google.com with SMTP id y84so7154792lfc.0 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 01:01:07 -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=1R8Id7v0USuWyWNHERwHSPKAUauDGysuhFDjst0yKhA=; b=C5lZx3BV6kjTRzoROGoeS4ixQACrGHprvX76Z6ywW7PQhIhaWurdW6WBXDyPoVHqIb Z21H398gEAuoDmz6sttdJo0xXc3Pcna+kO1XlyavEnSkG5bIKG60yQl63obd262VP82Y gDduIEMbuPtpA8VYOMix0T/S4EM1nhG4fh9gODASbEdHw4BKuV+R60A0pEEMc7Ej/Q6I bd3wrSdVTdO6vuyi0HoD6/dSJTl5Q6tKMfJyn3J8woSadPYRfNPjikEzNRYo0HPgfHkK VWHaVDr8XcUZpLW7JlYXnp0IEHHJ/NPFu3miZL+FnniAsGpC+liWHL7kKLfTDhz4CLEy bSJg== 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=1R8Id7v0USuWyWNHERwHSPKAUauDGysuhFDjst0yKhA=; b=C9TN+KcuVbj+Mc038Uh4ehVA7kcdY5j8iSGrv14XMhUsU7VsWFYZ1U+VlPTU8vOwYI Z0QFw/6vvVPAUrrm9MbSkZ/633p7wHtV3AwbMLME3XBYaEWJv1kvEy5nz1WWYXUeuQWC Li58lZORYg9lDehAIdOsVhhcPhM3Qc6l3gDqf+omeofssAg2qc37i4JUbfiJC1aPdEhJ KIvkee4xkhyCsFXrIlIR7j6MHF61DKjV5zyf+eXiM4N+lQEr6UJB9095eNV/P6i14iEi oeM9aQrYnNY5YTJfLptjdEFsyycHkw4oZcnbgxlerBm+54W6fTpmviF7fTaRg2DZvnEN Z/vA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FXlzkkpazgkWLLnVUuk3qMkVa9cxygYR17pjw2X3NfmAI0vWjUxd8IA640RZIOCW8hK8Vaq8ihbOAoCoQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.28.75 with SMTP id z11mr672007lbg.40.1461657660895; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 01:01:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.25.205.66 with HTTP; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 01:01:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <14B83AD6-319C-4DBF-A28C-6A172D84BE52@gmail.com> References: <14B83AD6-319C-4DBF-A28C-6A172D84BE52@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 09:01:00 +0100 Message-ID: From: And Rosta 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] IRC vs Email Meetings 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="===============6314584492235927299==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============6314584492235927299== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1133eca6a93a1f05315eb169 --001a1133eca6a93a1f05315eb169 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The chair can shepherd the meeting along, setting deadlines, and so forth, but as I said, it's an onerous job. If the chair can execute that taxing job well, then the meeting runs well. But it's a really big ask of the chair. However, as a way to ease the burden, what about having, by email, a longer period of informal discussion, followed by, still by email, the formal meeting operating to a strictish schedule, where there is understood to be a social obligation on LLG members not to move out of the blue or discuss at the formal meeting anything that could have been discussed at the informal stage, so at the formal meeting one would only discuss, say, the ramifications of votes whose outcomes were not reasonably predictable in advance of the meeting? To make things even simpler, schedule the formal meetings a year in advance, and just leave it to members to make sure they've done all necessary discussion in time for the meeting. --And. On 26 April 2016 at 08:36, Riley Martinez-Lynch wrote= : > I don=E2=80=99t think it is fair to fault the chair of the meeting for wh= at is > cumbersome about the format. A meeting that lasts for months is difficult > to plan around. It can heat up unexpectedly, with votes called suddenly, = or > lose people=E2=80=99s attention over time. Vacations, illness, seasonal w= ork > demands: The longer the meeting goes, the greater the chances of > conflicting commitments. That seems to me a function of time, independent > of the style of the chair. > > Long email threads are also difficult to follow. Several times throughout > this meeting I have gone digging through months of messages to answer > questions such as, was this report given, was this motion seconded, did > this motion pass, etc. > > I think it=E2=80=99s good that the matters that we discuss are discussed = at > length. But I continue to question whether it is optimal to do it all in > the on-the-record and actionable context of the member=E2=80=99s meeting.= I accept > that this is a minority opinion. > > =E2=80=94Riley no=E2=80=99u la mukti > _______________________________________________ > Llg-members mailing list > Llg-members@lojban.org > http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members > --001a1133eca6a93a1f05315eb169 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The chair can shepherd the meeting along, setting deadline= s, and so forth, but as I said, it's an onerous job. If the chair can e= xecute that taxing job well, then the meeting runs well. But it's a rea= lly big ask of the chair.

However, as a way to ease the = burden, what about having, by email, a longer period of informal discussion= , followed by, still by email, the formal meeting operating to a strictish = schedule, where there is understood to be a social obligation on LLG member= s not to move out of the blue or discuss at the formal meeting anything tha= t could have been discussed at the informal stage, so at the formal meeting= one would only discuss, say, the ramifications of votes whose outcomes wer= e not reasonably predictable in advance of the meeting? To make things even= simpler, schedule the formal meetings a year in advance, and just leave it= to members to make sure they've done all necessary discussion in time = for the meeting.

--And.

On 26 April 2016 at 08:36, Riley= Martinez-Lynch <shunpiker@gmail.com> wrote:
I don=E2=80=99t think it is fair to fault the chair of= the meeting for what is cumbersome about the format. A meeting that lasts = for months is difficult to plan around. It can heat up unexpectedly, with v= otes called suddenly, or lose people=E2=80=99s attention over time. Vacatio= ns, illness, seasonal work demands: The longer the meeting goes, the greate= r the chances of conflicting commitments. That seems to me a function of ti= me, independent of the style of the chair.

Long email threads are also difficult to follow. Several times throughout t= his meeting I have gone digging through months of messages to answer questi= ons such as, was this report given, was this motion seconded, did this moti= on pass, etc.

I think it=E2=80=99s good that the matters that we discuss are discussed at= length. But I continue to question whether it is optimal to do it all in t= he on-the-record and actionable context of the member=E2=80=99s meeting. I = accept that this is a minority opinion.

=E2=80=94Riley no=E2=80=99u la mukti
_______________________________________________
Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@lojban.org
http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-membe= rs

--001a1133eca6a93a1f05315eb169-- --===============6314584492235927299== 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 --===============6314584492235927299==--