Received: from localhost ([::1]:52360 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1d3387-0002gH-M8; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 09:15:55 -0700 Received: from mail-yw0-f174.google.com ([209.85.161.174]:32846) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1d3385-0002fP-90 for llg-members@lojban.org; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 09:15:54 -0700 Received: by mail-yw0-f174.google.com with SMTP id 203so95306556ywe.0 for ; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 09:15:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=f9lwWaXXzyleERmgeG543+eaojETuF23/hkBh+HCes0=; b=MPYPH6Vgoo5W8ip4VlU/mYSQfoca/teL0Frz102DUftGDciOAjEcXQ4q+iYOp7gZ66 OSImyYZmwrHHSDwMcc5MujQmYo/hd0Bmb2u9v9AS/5OPPCNTxOTg+rZOaFEdiiCKTIdm i/z3f4KpDI5X2QwyEH3Qg2idYOiQ3eVE3naQBkKc7sy0zrD0N4Bakcq75xFSIJe4l2ZU bEHS9/vckBMPSxQIRmaTMdK1020Vm/v3RUlf/oGpSOnNDA4jFU+5pfNZanVYuY2A0y7f 3Pfl+ES7eGP/tjplW5H75eRTp5oNCyevNdK8HvTFC/AX436ML4rKzON6wlKR4xZUydtp AZGA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=f9lwWaXXzyleERmgeG543+eaojETuF23/hkBh+HCes0=; b=kg8N/oF4mltKZF2vqWLmR9u9FjxkbHrrDt5pmpa3X0wd0x7EuIsXSos/CO560om4mz Zv9H0EZKyehXQBspV7vkPP679hrpB0RFmETl4Gfc/Dr/Z5xr0VDLDNtKcAG2K2hX3gUu dPDbUI6r2gKL1mY5lokJvJ0AXUmE61RWeAL75q8V0MZrZcBozLKCLqENc7AzhhPmPCw5 Wro2VYjUEs9QVMjEZwR+pKTorHieHoTPSYPoZOlAORRshaqHEwLjxPEmCdnMU+xS9nfg oTU3B1cRuMrP0Fcc1HVdv0kQjUgRDR+a2aJ+CofDJWF5RnNh3wMWhd0itkfHOnvQgIDL PkaA== X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/780RFHdmAo/oELvAnaxa6wxcCgXrXRnXdK+44MDdMJTLNeZPbr 7kjWuFRRUnmuatSjEhGmNkdl+YwTNg== X-Received: by 10.13.237.197 with SMTP id w188mr9802942ywe.7.1493136946572; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 09:15:46 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.13.202.131 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 09:15:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <78259B26-D0FF-406A-9700-6A3B14ADBF4E@gmail.com> References: <0457f7fe-dfd2-2ef6-9402-00d1dd15b239@lojban.org> <5966e78d-0e2f-bf8e-c019-1686671bb7d3@lojban.org> <78259B26-D0FF-406A-9700-6A3B14ADBF4E@gmail.com> From: Gleki Arxokuna Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2017 19:15:06 +0300 Message-ID: To: llg-members@lojban.org X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.5 X-Spam_score_int: -14 X-Spam_bar: - Subject: Re: [Llg-members] Adjourn? was Re: 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="===============1577525207895340024==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============1577525207895340024== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c087ae84d4b62054e000971 --94eb2c087ae84d4b62054e000971 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 2017-04-25 18:55 GMT+03:00 Karen Stein : > I move to adjourn the current meeting. > I second (of others should reply) > > I also suggest that the 2017 meeting have June 1 as the date to have items > for the agenda, and discussion start on June 2. > fine. > I picked these dates for two reasons: since Summer (Northern Hemisphere) > is a time many take vacations and may have more time to participate, and > also in order that the 2017 meeting end before the November-December > holiday season. > > .karis. > > On April 25, 2017 7:38:27 AM EDT, Bob LeChevalier > wrote: >> >> On 4/23/2017 7:16 PM, Bob LeChevalier wrote: >> >>> The short answer is that I don't know exactly what we are doing. Unless >>> the members wish to decide now, it will be up to the Board, strongly >>> affected by whoever is President and therefore running the meeting. >>> >>> While what I described was different from the above, I think I >>> assimilated parts of it, to wit: >>> >>>> 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, >>>> >>> .... >>> gleki: >>> >>>> "conduct meetings in IRC PARTIALLY ... presenting transcripts >>>> >>> >>> with the partial solution to the problem of non-inclusiveness to be that >>> we conduct the discussion in IRC and on this mailing list IN ADVANCE OF >>> THE MEETING, which is in keeping with having the agenda fixed in advance. >>> >>> The point being that people don't need to wait until the next meeting to >>> discuss issues informally, thereby coming to a consensus motion that >>> would need only a pro-forma vote during the meeting. >>> >>> At this point, I am easy to please, because we've had 2 years of what I >>> consider to be near-total failures to hold a real meeting. A meeting >>> that takes months, for which half of the people who are nominally >>> present aren't paying enough attention to cast their Board vote within a >>> week of the call for votes, can hardly be worse than any of the options >>> referred to above. (I admit my own weakness of leadership as being >>> partly at fault, but I didn't see any sign of people preferring >>> something different to what I was and wasn't doing.) >>> >> >> Assuming that Karen is satisfied with my clarification... >> >> we either need a motion addressing the question of how the meeting is to >> be conducted >> >> or a motion to adjourn? >> >> If someone makes such a motion, then if there is no objection within 3 >> days, the motion will be assumed to be approved. Or people can vote. >> >> lojbab >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> 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 > > --94eb2c087ae84d4b62054e000971 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


2017-04-25 18:55 GMT+03:00 Karen Stein <comcaresvcs@gmail.com&= gt;:
I move to adjourn the cu= rrent meeting.

I second (of othe= rs should reply)
=C2=A0

I also suggest that the 2017 meeting have June 1 as the date to have items = for the agenda, and discussion start on June 2.

=
fine.
=C2=A0
= I picked these dates for two reasons: since Summer (Northern Hemisphere) i= s a time many take vacations and may have more time to participate, and als= o in order that the 2017 meeting end before the November-December holiday s= eason.

.karis.

On April 25, 2017 7:38:27 AM EDT,= Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
On 4/23/2017 7:16 PM, Bob LeChev=
alier wrote:
 The short answer =
is that I don't know exactly what we are doing.  Unless
 the members=
 wish to decide now, it will be up to the Board, strongly
 affected by w=
hoever is President and therefore running the meeting.

 While what I=
 described was  different from the above, I think I
 assimilated parts o=
f it, to wit:
 Riley originally=
 proposed,
 "I would strongly prefer that we adopt a format like th=
e Language
 Creation Society: We fix the agenda for the meeting beforeha=
nd,
 ....
 gleki:
 "conduct meetings in IRC PARTIALLY ... presenting transcripts

 with the partial solution to the problem of non-inclusi=
veness to be that
 we conduct the discussion in IRC and on this mailing =
list IN ADVANCE OF
 THE MEETING, which is in keeping with having the age=
nda fixed in advance.

 The point being that people don't need to=
 wait until the next meeting to
 discuss issues informally, thereby comi=
ng to a consensus motion that
 would need only a pro-forma vote during t=
he meeting.

 At this point, I am easy to please, because we've h=
ad 2 years of what I
 consider to be near-total failures to hold a real =
meeting.  A meeting
 that takes months, for which half of the people who=
 are nominally
 present aren't paying enough attention to cast their=
 Board vote within a
 week of the call for votes, can hardly be worse th=
an any of the options
 referred to above. (I admit my own weakness of le=
adership as being
 partly at fault, but I didn't see any sign of peo=
ple preferring
 something different to what I was and wasn't doing.)=


Assuming that Karen is satisfied with my clarification=
...

we either need a motion addressing the question of how the meeti=
ng is to 
be conducted

or a motion to adjourn?

If someone =
makes such a motion, then if there is no objection within 3 
days, the m=
otion will be assumed to be approved.  Or people can vote.

lojbab


Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@lojban.org
http://m=
ail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members
=

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


--94eb2c087ae84d4b62054e000971-- --===============1577525207895340024== 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 --===============1577525207895340024==--