Received: from localhost ([::1]:37656 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eZ3kc-00014k-P4; Tue, 09 Jan 2018 15:56:14 -0800 Received: from mail-vk0-f42.google.com ([209.85.213.42]:45761) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eZ3k6-000131-6h for llg-members@lojban.org; Tue, 09 Jan 2018 15:55:43 -0800 Received: by mail-vk0-f42.google.com with SMTP id o16so10500483vke.12 for ; Tue, 09 Jan 2018 15:55:41 -0800 (PST) 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=P7ZQMjV/DmCVHzMAbCBDivMFjDbVp15eJpKluRfysgI=; b=T+e8JI+aCUdlTJ44rdxaf6Rp0Kq2Klf041G116l5x4wHR0/97mILX/dgOyJzlp57G8 wO3IoIOwwRMz39QuGjKaKe+YBJg0KAjApyVsTkDN57KX1hQGC9WAf9HrAOvm+AYoi/ba VVzwAqbhl/GfizcVYVVviG2mRsflDtJXGVp9usrgVQgjH7Qpbonvq0bLEstf85TW47PN VMgMlbDcc9kMvkTXu56ZT0qF4chbWsVl2rPF3F1w2mgCEDh34UX/9uWUEPCG2Ry4EKoA mBPEwRlifGU2b/S33rl/VGpVUVV3WCLgXQJIADT9UGwZqdKtqr1ifZRZZ9kBEMegQrAU ZfXQ== 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=P7ZQMjV/DmCVHzMAbCBDivMFjDbVp15eJpKluRfysgI=; b=KRsUbOntg1Es6oQ90ZJ/vypE+P7b94+/XKBFdS4XsrbNIgAQj97QAlPZfg9CUF9tmQ xsEBson2RGmHQkrTHsEWerka+3BYeEi0WNLfmr5P6rkMpRieWllaPt7H/l14mImrKHov JxQd/USDlhiWKVKtBYNr3wM9u8qINdlAwfigHFNMhK6jUwm6l0Vw6mCVXxApyAtz1pzC wIr8ZzyWGaz2X8VXkkD6OVOyCtmEn3L5mEtCBklIdfcAMriK8IiVRL6gtsgmtTupfOLF LKpcT8BYkxs6ruPVo7r6TqdQ5cT8tp013SrO/EV2UD0IOXmRsQzEDrYHFlYSc9o2Xrkp xEIg== X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxytdZQ6ZM3Bzp0E9Jucor8gSljiIX5lvb8QJL8Fpq2YQgoxJKyW/p G2ZzaazKRZbNB24Cr+JG+xCcH7w4d25xg1oK71c= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBou35yE/EFrcutxW3KrUqyes0XuExkt++EMG3KBE3j2qCo5WOyJ6j8cRVbSdM7yFFuNJX5yPj2HGscJwm12sK4c= X-Received: by 10.31.223.129 with SMTP id w123mr14626301vkg.13.1515542135027; Tue, 09 Jan 2018 15:55:35 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.176.27.18 with HTTP; Tue, 9 Jan 2018 15:55:33 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.176.27.18 with HTTP; Tue, 9 Jan 2018 15:55:33 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Creative Care Services Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 18:55:33 -0500 Message-ID: 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] Concerning Unofficial Social Media Presences 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="===============4040320719181208291==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============4040320719181208291== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c07dc9099bc1b056260a64b" --94eb2c07dc9099bc1b056260a64b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Guskant, The request had been made to you personally and in discussions by several people, including officers, that you refrain from accusatory comments against Gleki. If you wish to discuss your concerns about the situations you list please retype them removing reference to Gleki by name in each instance. This is a place to discuss possible solutions, not a forum for rehashing personal attacks whether you believe them warranted or not. If you will make a motion that is within these guidelines, then a discussion can occur. .karis. On Jan 8, 2018 04:02, "guskant" wrote: > I did not second the motion because it seems excessive for removing or > avoiding the current and the future disorder about what is the > official information. > > Anyone can create accounts on social media that may deceive people > into believing that it were owned by the LLG. The number of such > accounts should be finite but can be very large, and then it will be > too much work for a small group to investigate the nastiness of each > account. The problem can be solved in another way: if the LLG has an > official website and declare on the top page that the LLG does not own > any accounts on any social media, people will become aware of the > deceit. The real problem is that the LLG has no official website that > should be under control of the LLG, and therefore it is impossible > that the LLG would declare something on a top page of a website. > > Currently, the following information is out of control of the LLG, and > actually deceives people into believing that the information were > approved by the LLG: > > - All files under https://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ that is a symbolic > link of Gleki's personal directory: > http://vrici.lojban.org/~gleki/mediawiki-1.19.2/extensions/ > - most of mediawiki or tiki pages under *.lojban.org that are managed > by volunteers with no rule > - All repositories of Gleki's la-lojban https://github.com/la-lojban , > some of which are published as web pages under > https://la-lojban.github.io/ . > - All repositories of the Lojban Coders' Group > https://github.com/lojban that are managed by volunteers with no rule, > some of which are published as web pages under > https://lojban.github.io/ . > > The LLG can ask the administrators of them for adding a disclaimer on > each webpage that the contents are out of control of the LLG, but such > a petition may be ignored by the administrators. Instead, it would be > a certain counter-measure to create an official website of the LLG and > to declare on the top page that the LLG is not responsible for the > contents on any other websites like *.lojban.org, la-lojban.github.io > or lojban.github.io. My last motion would solve the problem, though it > was ignored and not discussed by the LLG. > http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/private/llg-members/ > 2017-February/001357.html > > mi'e la guskant > > > 2018-01-08 6:23 GMT+00:00 Curtis Franks : > > I would like to hear from .guskant. about this. > > > > On Dec 29, 2017 03:06, "Curtis Franks" > wrote: > >> > >> I propose (not quite as a motion) that the LLG adopt an official policy > >> that the LLG or some body constituted by it for such purpose search for > and > >> monitor social media or blog platforms, accounts, pages, profiles, > groups, > >> communities, bots, etc. (hereafter called "entities") which in any way > >> whatsoever relate to, promote, or use Lojban or other LLG-adopted > logical > >> languages and which are not clearly human, personal, non-promoting, or > >> unofficial - and that such a body requests such entities to prominently > >> display a disclaimer stating that they are unofficial and not endorsed > by > >> the LLG. > >> > >> (I do not think that we can enforce such requests, just make them. But > >> having an official policy about addressing them may be good and gives us > >> some moral 'standing') > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > --94eb2c07dc9099bc1b056260a64b Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Guskant,

The= request had been made to you personally and in discussions by several peop= le, including officers, that you refrain from accusatory comments against G= leki. If you wish to discuss your concerns about the situations you list pl= ease retype them removing reference to Gleki by name in each instance. This= is a place to discuss possible solutions, not a forum for rehashing person= al attacks whether you believe them warranted or not.

If you will make a motion that is within thes= e guidelines, then a discussion can occur.

.karis.

On Jan 8, 2018 04:02, "guskant" <gusni.kantu@gmail.com> wrote:
I did not second the mot= ion because it seems excessive for removing or
avoiding the current and the future disorder about what is the
official information.

Anyone can create accounts on social media that may deceive people
into believing that it were owned by the LLG. The number of such
accounts should be finite but can be very large, and then it will be
too much work for a small group to investigate the nastiness of each
account. The problem can be solved in another way: if the LLG has an
official website and declare on the top page that the LLG does not own
any accounts on any social media, people will become aware of the
deceit. The real problem is that the LLG has no official website that
should be under control of the LLG, and therefore it is impossible
that the LLG would declare something on a top page of a website.

Currently, the following information is out of control of the LLG, and
actually deceives people into believing that the information were
approved by the LLG:

- All files under https://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ that i= s a symbolic
link of Gleki's personal directory:
http://vrici.lojban.org/~gleki/media= wiki-1.19.2/extensions/
- most of mediawiki or tiki pages under *.lojban.org that are managed
by volunteers with no rule
- All repositories of Gleki's la-lojban https://github.com/la-lojban= ,
some of which are published as web pages under
https://la-lojban.github.io/ .
- All repositories of the Lojban Coders' Group
= https://github.com/lojban that are managed by volunteers with no rule,<= br> some of which are published as web pages under
= https://lojban.github.io/ .

The LLG can ask the administrators of them for adding a disclaimer on
each webpage that the contents are out of control of the LLG, but such
a petition may be ignored by the administrators. Instead, it would be
a certain counter-measure to create an official website of the LLG and
to declare on the top page that the LLG is not responsible for the
contents on any other websites like *.lojban.org, la-lojban.github.io
or lojban.github.io. My last motion would solve the problem, though it was ignored and not discussed by the LLG.
http://mail.lojban.org/<= wbr>mailman/private/llg-members/2017-February/001357.html

mi'e la guskant


2018-01-08 6:23 GMT+00:00 Curtis Franks <curtis.w.franks@gmail.com>:
> I would like to hear from .guskant. about this.
>
> On Dec 29, 2017 03:06, "Curtis Franks" <curtis.w.franks@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I propose (not quite as a motion) that the LLG adopt an official p= olicy
>> that the LLG or some body constituted by it for such purpose searc= h for and
>> monitor social media or blog platforms, accounts, pages, profiles,= groups,
>> communities, bots, etc. (hereafter called "entities") wh= ich in any way
>> whatsoever relate to, promote, or use Lojban or other LLG-adopted = logical
>> languages and which are not clearly human, personal, non-promoting= , or
>> unofficial - and that such a body requests such entities to promin= ently
>> display a disclaimer stating that they are unofficial and not endo= rsed by
>> the LLG.
>>
>> (I do not think that we can enforce such requests, just make them.= But
>> having an official policy about addressing them may be good and gi= ves us
>> some moral 'standing')
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
--94eb2c07dc9099bc1b056260a64b-- --===============4040320719181208291== 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 --===============4040320719181208291==--