MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <61CCB92E-11C6-4F17-9A63-AF3519E8416D@gmail.com>
References: <CADbAA4VD5tDSfmx23WZw_M-8gxOu-GRsHBOKy3Ug3-giAUqcUw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFoHDTeRgCCoR-Wjrg62w2jGNgy9eh9TE_LzS-9_YAXqj44eqA@mail.gmail.com>
 <61CCB92E-11C6-4F17-9A63-AF3519E8416D@gmail.com>
From: Curtis Franks <curtis.w.franks@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 15:01:08 -0500
Message-ID: <CAFoHDTcz+vvmQXPnxNfXK1fvjiWZpo42Dt99gkL43E206-1jsw@mail.gmail.com>
To: llg-members@lojban.org
X-Spam_score: -1.5
X-Spam_score_int: -14
X-Spam_bar: -
Subject: Re: [Llg-members] Proposal : Investigation of Unofficialness
X-BeenThere: llg-members@lojban.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21
Precedence: list
List-Id: <llg-members.lojban.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/options/llg-members>,
 <mailto:llg-members-request@lojban.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/private/llg-members/>
List-Post: <mailto:llg-members@lojban.org>
List-Help: <mailto:llg-members-request@lojban.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members>,
 <mailto:llg-members-request@lojban.org?subject=subscribe>
Reply-To: llg-members@lojban.org
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4281299275953617912=="
Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org

--===============4281299275953617912==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c06b32ecff0cc05620ce805"

--94eb2c06b32ecff0cc05620ce805
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Jan 5, 2018 14:31, "Riley Martinez-Lynch" <shunpiker@gmail.com> wrote:

I would support a motion like #5 which requires a disclaimer on lojban.org
content that might be easily confused as an official publication of LLG.
However, I think we should consider this alongside the option of reserving
lojban.org for official publications of LLG.


It might be worthwhile to propose at least the former option as an
amendment or countering measure to Motion 5 in that case. Yours would be
narrower and safer, and probably would still satisfy guskant.

--94eb2c06b32ecff0cc05620ce805
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"auto"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra" dir=3D"auto"><br><div clas=
s=3D"gmail_quote">On Jan 5, 2018 14:31, &quot;Riley Martinez-Lynch&quot; &l=
t;<a href=3D"mailto:shunpiker@gmail.com">shunpiker@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:=
<br type=3D"attribution"><blockquote class=3D"quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 =
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style=3D"word-wrap:b=
reak-word"><div>I would support a motion like #5 which requires a disclaime=
r on <a href=3D"http://lojban.org" target=3D"_blank">lojban.org</a> content=
 that might be easily confused as an official publication of LLG. However, =
I think we should consider this alongside the option of reserving <a href=
=3D"http://lojban.org" target=3D"_blank">lojban.org</a>=C2=A0for official p=
ublications of LLG.</div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir=3D"auto"><=
br></div><div dir=3D"auto">It might be worthwhile to propose at least the f=
ormer option as an amendment or countering measure to Motion 5 in that case=
. Yours would be narrower and safer, and probably would still satisfy guska=
nt.</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra" dir=3D"auto"></div></div>

--94eb2c06b32ecff0cc05620ce805--


--===============4281299275953617912==
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

--===============4281299275953617912==--