Received: from localhost ([::1]:60672 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eyQT2-0003R0-9a; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 16:14:56 -0700 Received: from mail-ua0-f176.google.com ([209.85.217.176]:46730) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eyQSU-0003Po-Jr for llg-members@lojban.org; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 16:14:24 -0700 Received: by mail-ua0-f176.google.com with SMTP id d1so2183760ual.13 for ; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 16:14:22 -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=Sx5ooZ4z9EdgcJ88h8xaOhVPr5CqdaKDx87lFHf5Ne8=; b=gXYxhaZOkaicXMs6grarBtEJfm8xFiDbv6Q4OwtgrRRYlyvWzEQejpQTrZd8VaGRMe uJY/+Dvm+XXBqA0HS784rCYdXbr+YTQD0bvfeXyg/ZoTVzcU2U/HccdBMbhzQCi7d737 2TogzS537vQc+AGsoNjFyxPh9bU+61xTZKUJAbGpikuoOG9spTWrs7jBUAysaFcyxFl2 6HA4gbtnLjgvebNVr5b0BTFwTG3t231UQuES03iZqqwEoI3eyRYhAE5gHtD2lGFvnO5Y eQNOZqQTzKEa0Rs7Hwr2GzKxhtBgyV8DtPaz/WIQk+ABj9m+zcL0UqugVh6wfl32zoLc X9Hw== 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=Sx5ooZ4z9EdgcJ88h8xaOhVPr5CqdaKDx87lFHf5Ne8=; b=NQ0suI5wYuI4+5dWpGGMiZBaYR1kjm/MbkizMdx78omlmcqfg4c7e5kh46ygsuCH9q 5DuLMGlTnNe8Nfyx3G+y/szIKh7TyLKHAnmO2Ja4/gmbYucYPuurKQvpo9pUv2eCjY7+ oG1cUP+358mERvU7zRZ0wrcvbs5AKhr/p0cv473/OCgA2iTgROfS3/jZkFI7fj39qxHK BBJN1sDM/JyYrzBFx2rIffdTEDH46oE2zNZzyqB77ZGKNA1zRTnP7uAx/qryFUKwA+0+ WoX8qP2C5Kew4gjEE8v61TiG+CDn++iAw468HJFtJk6CFTIsHhA8FIaM4855zNtYPA/s fI8g== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7EkBV1wCz9rrvgK1LhcSJcmt+LLIQFxlygSYqnZyNorz03kVrRt bUfOkXCN/Xf6jTGYalVtpXoSARerYlwz+WTvPn8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELtGVYOEu//ALl1qsMgquA3haSHjpRxlaXo4o0yyRw4qZ2dMDIIeYt7GpLjl/bzyXo6vBVrN1kcuLTLN479p7k0= X-Received: by 10.159.35.72 with SMTP id 66mr13005932uae.130.1521587654844; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 16:14:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.176.1.230 with HTTP; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 16:13:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1cc70426-111b-0d0a-80e3-b568b4e77cf1@lojban.org> References: <911780df-0d1e-0137-8efd-83a3e6a80e47@selpahi.de> <1cc70426-111b-0d0a-80e3-b568b4e77cf1@lojban.org> From: Alex Burka Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 19:13:54 -0400 Message-ID: To: llg-members@lojban.org X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_bar: - Subject: Re: [Llg-members] Vote to Adjourn, cast your ballot here 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="===============4877910667172452563==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============4877910667172452563== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11353092a965750567e03b7f" --001a11353092a965750567e03b7f Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" FWIW I share selpa'i's frustration that we never got to new business. The (arguable) hijacking of old business to debate numerous interlocking, convoluted motions was part of the problem, as well as the meeting format not fitting the medium (I think we have more than enough evidence the Robert's-Rules-over-email is about as efficient as IP-over-carrier-pigeon ). Whether this means a new format is needed, or LLG is just not the place to get anything done, I can't say. On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 1:35 PM, Bob LeChevalier wrote: > On 3/18/2018 11:31 AM, guskant wrote: > >> The LLG has >> been neglecting the problems I raised for two years, and additionally, >> you have let me loose my chance for raising two motions that I >> prepared for "New Business" in this meeting, although I repeatedly >> told you in this meeting that I was only waiting for the time of >> talking about the subject. >> > > I suggest that as soon as the meeting is actually adjourned that you raise > these topics just as you intended, , on this list, but outside the formal > meeting. You might consider spacing them out by a week or so. I also > suggest clearly marking each numerically as "topic 1", "topic 2", so people > can keep them straight if to many topics are active at one time. > > You can state these as potential motions, or perhaps better, talk about > the issues, and wait until things are well discussed before formalizing > them. The officers will then use these discussions as a starting point for > the agenda of the 2018 meeting, or possibly the Board can consider and > adopt policies even before the 2018 meeting. > > I make the same suggestion to selpa'i who felt that some things need to be > discussed that weren't. If he wants things to be discussed, please raise > them for discussion immediately after the formal meeting ends. You can have > your say and get youir desired subjects discussed even if not still a > member because I doubt that mukti will remove you from the list quickly > (unless you ask him to do so). And you won't be bound by the formalism of > either LLG as an organization, or by byfy membership (I'm not sure most > people know who current members of byfy are). Again, I suggest numbering > topics if more than one is discussed so people can keep the threads > distinct in their minds even if they don't read the list every day. > > Also, for either of you and anyone else, if you want a larger audience to > discuss a topic than the LLG membership plus hangers on, consider raising > the topic in the main Lojban List rather than in the members list. > > The organization is changing as it moves on from having me in charge, but > not daily active due to health, to new people who aren't yet familiar with > running meetings online. The issues can be discussed and then however the > community decides, the organizations (LLG, byfy, or whatever) can decide > whether they are capable and best suited for implementing those decisions > and managing any ongoing organized activity(s). > > lojbab > > > _______________________________________________ > Llg-members mailing list > Llg-members@lojban.org > http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members > --001a11353092a965750567e03b7f Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
FWIW I share selpa'i's frustration that we never g= ot to new business. The (arguable) hijacking of old business to debate nume= rous interlocking, convoluted motions was part of the problem, as well as t= he meeting format not fitting the medium (I think we have more than enough = evidence the Robert's-Rules-over-email is about as efficient as IP-over-carrier-pigeon). Whet= her this means a new format is needed, or LLG is just not the place to get = anything done, I can't say.

On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 1:35 PM, Bob LeChevalier <= lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
<= span class=3D"">On 3/18/2018 11:31 AM, guskant wrote:
The LLG has
been neglecting the problems I raised for two years, and additionally,
you have let me loose my chance for raising two motions that I
prepared for "New Business" in this meeting, although I repeatedl= y
told you in this meeting that I was only waiting for the time of
talking about the subject.

I suggest that as soon as the meeting is actually adjourned that you raise = these topics just as you intended, , on this list, but outside the formal m= eeting.=C2=A0 You might consider spacing them out by a week or so.=C2=A0 I = also suggest clearly marking each numerically as "topic 1", "= ;topic 2", so people can keep them straight if to many topics are acti= ve at one time.

You can state these as potential motions, or perhaps better, talk about the= issues, and wait until things are well discussed before formalizing them.= =C2=A0 The officers will then use these discussions as a starting point for= the agenda of the 2018 meeting, or possibly the Board can consider and ado= pt policies even before the 2018 meeting.

I make the same suggestion to selpa'i who felt that some things need to= be discussed that weren't.=C2=A0 If he wants things to be discussed, p= lease raise them for discussion immediately after the formal meeting ends. = You can have your say and get youir desired subjects discussed even if not = still a member because I doubt that mukti will remove you from the list qui= ckly (unless you ask him to do so).=C2=A0 And you won't be bound by the= formalism of either LLG as an organization, or by byfy membership (I'm= not sure most people know who current members of byfy are).=C2=A0 Again, I= suggest numbering topics if more than one is discussed so people can keep = the threads distinct in their minds even if they don't read the list ev= ery day.

Also, for either of you and anyone else, if you want a larger audience to d= iscuss a topic than the LLG membership plus hangers on, consider raising th= e topic in the main Lojban List rather than in the members list.

The organization is changing as it moves on from having me in charge, but n= ot daily active due to health, to new people who aren't yet familiar wi= th running meetings online.=C2=A0 The issues can be discussed and then howe= ver the community decides, the organizations (LLG, byfy, or whatever) can d= ecide whether they are capable and best suited for implementing those decis= ions and managing any ongoing organized activity(s).

lojbab


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

--001a11353092a965750567e03b7f-- --===============4877910667172452563== 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 --===============4877910667172452563==--