Received: from localhost ([::1]:42208 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1d2P1C-0007pJ-BZ; Sun, 23 Apr 2017 14:26:06 -0700 Received: from mail-qk0-f177.google.com ([209.85.220.177]:36793) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1d2P1A-0007pD-A1 for llg-members@lojban.org; Sun, 23 Apr 2017 14:26:05 -0700 Received: by mail-qk0-f177.google.com with SMTP id u75so6839250qka.3 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2017 14:26:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:disposition-notification-to:return-receipt-to:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:subject:to:from :message-id; bh=cMSe4EwWtUsh78Zodo0p71GhoJqDM+JifsjRSL/bU2s=; b=f7QVlY2w+/nAs6cQENEjI9v2/FYVUJbfN/m/0IbI+IGyLpXAvz6r17JwdhOIyOcx7G vbxjk4m4smCiWYud7S53Ng5O7Y1fAjMBkbiUlnYl8HYLS1PsQvKsnUxg6AEHNmAdQwve X3F+n6ZxnBS5+PQVybNKjg1FyFFzv5HbEU6+3YMq1PtmUHTFkHnG7+Ht3Nv9TlcRVPUJ TQCte3doED9FEuTfif65cZmmuA9sRXQ/IodCH2huRKLnN2coO5tzoTEsKzly28ThgAP0 LXTTuUOyJOIWev6TTOS6omptqJ1nm+jCkhobaNXDOCOY3Sz82Xm+3Wo5MIGobMmUb1jm 3kcQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:disposition-notification-to :return-receipt-to:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:subject:to:from:message-id; bh=cMSe4EwWtUsh78Zodo0p71GhoJqDM+JifsjRSL/bU2s=; b=rJf55fepPLlUvKHrX/QA+AFsTmFnPGV++KDf4v1iDdkAsALV7yEqo5ToFGyajXF8D3 qaj44QftSTKRBk3O5Kb8g+J4zbquxHI+nf5BROcgm5TWwXpxZADaE1HDNjfo1WbGPWAD 8brs0mm5xook+EhEoVGIHLBw+KiNpheh3Re62HojvqvF2mXG5BK9rB7JksyKmY/oL66f E7X8A160JVQ4CEY0ih/8z8oLqQgXb0kQy+Tc9P0jwtOjFAOG6QPAn+N0pnvlXxxzYh5u gxBgHEg4l0hV+RYSR08mgK3L41sVmb75bGgvJfsOZhQwtj1dta00C9uOBIqsxbYTT4Ur 9RCQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/6e2pA0Yt3ricU5AwC/6yfGovYCHKpT8igi+G1yJF90cLsAyFW1 59Vn9xaOGLL0oA== X-Received: by 10.55.60.67 with SMTP id j64mr2004512qka.316.1492982758028; Sun, 23 Apr 2017 14:25:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2601:5c0:c000:5293:b173:28bd:3807:d86? ([2601:5c0:c000:5293:b173:28bd:3807:d86]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x10sm11458718qtb.25.2017.04.23.14.25.56 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 23 Apr 2017 14:25:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2017 17:25:53 -0400 In-Reply-To: References: <0457f7fe-dfd2-2ef6-9402-00d1dd15b239@lojban.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 To: llg-members@lojban.org From: Karen Stein Message-ID: X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.5 X-Spam_score_int: -14 X-Spam_bar: - Subject: Re: [Llg-members] Request for clarification X-BeenThere: llg-members@lojban.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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="===============4599999379299352266==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============4599999379299352266== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----FAKJU83ME6F5SO0WJT7KNWH5GVDGTZ" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ------FAKJU83ME6F5SO0WJT7KNWH5GVDGTZ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable And, I sons remember you saying anything and I thought I was the only one conce= rned about this technology/generational/time available gap=2E I will system= clearly here that I believe people of all ages (over 18, or younger depend= ing) have important places in the past, present, and future of lojban and t= he lojban community so I don't want to leave anyone who wants to be involve= d in the dust=2E All should feel welcome and able to participate to the lev= el of interest, not their level of computer savvy=2E An experiment may, and= usually has to, closely limit the participants, but a growing language sho= uld not it needs all of the support, participation, and ideas available=2E =2Ekaris=2E On April 23, 2017 1:50:12 PM EDT, And Rosta wrot= e: >On 23 April 2017 at 05:18, Karen Stein wrote: > >> I dug around in old emails, and here is the highlights of the idea as >> discussed in February: >> >> Riley originally proposed, >> "I would strongly prefer that we adopt a format like the Language >Creation >> Society: We fix the agenda for the meeting beforehand, and conduct >the >> entire meeting in IRC in a period of hours=2E There have been >objections to >> this plan before on the basis that it=E2=80=99s hard to find a time whi= ch >works for >> people all over the world=2E While I agree that it=E2=80=99s important = for the >way >> that we conduct business to reflect the value that we place on >Lojban=E2=80=99s >> international character, as far as I can tell the current format >works well >> for no one=2E We can do better=2E" >> >> Gleki originally suggested having the entire meeting at one several >hour >> period of IRC conversation, then later changed this to, >> "conduct meetings in IRC PARTIALLY since we have to wait for other >members >> to appear=2E The logs of IRC meetings would be posted to this mailing >list so >> that others can add their replies=2E This way nothing would really >change and >> meetings would become more streamlined=2E" >> >> My response throughout the discussion of this has been that if the >initial >> discussion occurs on IRC or other real-time settings then, (1) there >will >> be a number of people (I believe a higher number than the few others >have >> said) unable to participate due to (a) the international nature of >the >> lojban community, (b) the variable comfort level of people with >technology >> and things like IRC, and (c) the time commitments of some of us, and >(2) >> presenting the transcript afterwards for those who couldn't attend >for >> their comments does nothing to change the fact the original >participants >> have already made up their minds and new input will not have nearly >the >> same chance of influencing these decisions=2E >> >> There was also discussion, if we follow Gleki's original suggestion, >of >> those who could not attend the IRC meeting putting in proxies in >advance=2E I >> think this even less inclusive=2E >> >> I did agree to try this method for one meeting since no one else >expressed >> the same concerns=2E At that time it is to be revisited=2E Now I want t= o >> clarify exactly what we are actually doing since these proposals are >> different=2E >> > >I can't remember if I replied when you originally made this point, >which I >sort of agree with=2E For my part, the demands on me of participation by >IRC >would exceed what I'm willing to give=2E But my current and foreseeable >levels of involvement with Lojban are so slight that if the LLG wanted >to >move to IRC meetings it would make more sense for me to resign >membership >than petition for meetings to continue by email for my sake (and >presumably >for the sake of others of what has become the older generation)=2E > >Possibly repeating myself here too, but I'd suggest that if moving to >IRC >meetings, the LLG, in order to avoid quoracy problems, should institute >a >policy of removing from membership members who don't show up for >meetings=2E > >--And=2E ------FAKJU83ME6F5SO0WJT7KNWH5GVDGTZ Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable And,

I sons remember you saying anything and I thought I was the only one conce= rned about this technology/generational/time available gap=2E I will system= clearly here that I believe people of all ages (over 18, or younger depend= ing) have important places in the past, present, and future of lojban and t= he lojban community so I don't want to leave anyone who wants to be inv= olved in the dust=2E All should feel welcome and able to participate to the= level of interest, not their level of computer savvy=2E An experiment may,= and usually has to, closely limit the participants, but a growing language= should not it needs all of the support, participation, and ideas available= =2E

=2Ekaris=2E

On April 23, 2017 1:50:12 PM= EDT, And Rosta <and=2Erosta@gmail=2Ecom> wrote:
On = 23 April 2017 at 05:18, Karen Stein <comcaresvcs@gmail=2Ecom>= wrote:
I dug around in o= ld emails, and here is the highlights of the idea as discussed in February:=

Riley originally proposed,
"I would strongly prefer that we adopt a format like the Language Cre= ation Society: We fix the agenda for the meeting beforehand, and conduct th= e entire meeting in IRC in a period of hours=2E There have been objections = to this plan before on the basis that it’s hard to find a time which = works for people all over the world=2E While I agree that it’s import= ant for the way that we conduct business to reflect the value that we place= on Lojban’s international character, as far as I can tell the curren= t format works well for no one=2E We can do better=2E"

Gleki originally suggested having the entire meeting at one several hour p= eriod of IRC conversation, then later changed this to,
"conduct meetings in IRC PARTIALLY since we have to wait for oth= er members to appear=2E The logs of IRC meetings would be posted to this ma= iling list so that others can add their replies=2E This way nothing would&n= bsp;really change and meetings would become more streamlined=2E"

My response throughout the discussion of this has been that if the initial= discussion occurs on IRC or other real-time settings then, (1) there will = be a number of people (I believe a higher number than the few others have s= aid) unable to participate due to (a) the international nature of the lojba= n community, (b) the variable comfort level of people with technology and t= hings like IRC, and (c) the time commitments of some of us, and (2) present= ing the transcript afterwards for those who couldn't attend for their comme= nts does nothing to change the fact the original participants have already = made up their minds and new input will not have nearly the same chance of i= nfluencing these decisions=2E

There was also discussion, if we follow Gleki's original suggestion, of th= ose who could not attend the IRC meeting putting in proxies in advance=2E I= think this even less inclusive=2E

I did agree to try this method for one meeting since no one else expressed= the same concerns=2E At that time it is to be revisited=2E Now I want to c= larify exactly what we are actually doing since these proposals are differe= nt=2E

I can't remember if I r= eplied when you originally made this point, which I sort of agree with=2E F= or my part, the demands on me of participation by IRC would exceed what I'm= willing to give=2E But my current and foreseeable levels of involvement wi= th Lojban are so slight that if the LLG wanted to move to IRC meetings it w= ould make more sense for me to resign membership than petition for meetings= to continue by email for my sake (and presumably for the sake of others of= what has become the older generation)=2E 

= Possibly repeating myself here too, but I'd suggest that if moving to IRC m= eetings, the LLG, in order to avoid quoracy problems, should institute a po= licy of removing from membership members who don't show up for meetings=2E<= /div>

--And=2E
------FAKJU83ME6F5SO0WJT7KNWH5GVDGTZ-- --===============4599999379299352266== 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 --===============4599999379299352266==--