Received: from localhost ([::1]:57448 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.85) (envelope-from ) id 1a9WdJ-0005J6-7E; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 03:22:05 -0800 Received: from mail-ig0-f180.google.com ([209.85.213.180]:34200) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.85) (envelope-from ) id 1a9WdA-0005H3-Fo for llg-members@lojban.org; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 03:22:01 -0800 Received: by mail-ig0-f180.google.com with SMTP id m11so10845292igk.1 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 03:21:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=gS4mAGl3UQfIiPcrKBbFPLyqEbuxlZayqiV1PXPByBU=; b=nIQicXNtGOz9HnPSWIhzvOyRYe2BB/tg+traE7xZarJGx6B18XjnaWIbCxCMDAbiHY IR42Bsop7JSUMbuzy4lZkl8MzOnyE/G37q7nnNa1UzeuDPEBW171d5pPReQ1UkstRr8x zi6td4wvefjmQLzOqBoV/fOX1wtZSRpOvnBs2Czfe7AIjrvdBHIwlVOB8z2U0MjXsqUZ i8z62LYwTnn5OX8EDXmdrSiGcPE+Vqai9jPqzPQ45WOUHvf4zHL9d5DljSpXaAI9k9cX sj+PLRZrkwqPF5kRkoayx4icJ4irqBYk5RmCPUBi1iNpq4L05kZH5DpY/I5hOFQzTvny ljiw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.82.97 with SMTP id h1mr2862299igy.67.1450351309953; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 03:21:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.50.227.2 with HTTP; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 03:21:49 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5671E710.2020407@lojban.org> References: <563CBDA4.5080308@selpahi.de> <4E514785-A922-4D75-B34A-EFB3880C5712@gmail.com> <566701E3.4060408@lojban.org> <566CD949.7010504@lojban.org> <5671E710.2020407@lojban.org> Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 11:21:49 +0000 Message-ID: From: And Rosta 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] 2015 Annual Meeting X-BeenThere: llg-members@lojban.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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="===============2927138143074662209==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============2927138143074662209== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7beb9f3ca1240e0527163ab2 --047d7beb9f3ca1240e0527163ab2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On 16 December 2015 at 22:34, Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG < lojbab@lojban.org> wrote: > So that time is not wasted, I would like the membership to discuss what > they think LLG should be doing with regard to Lojban, both in terms of > goals and activities. You can look to the Bylaws as to the scope of what > we are allowed to do, but what we actually do, is primarily determined by > you-all as voting members, and by the activities of the larger Lojban > community that you represent. > > I would love to see *each and every one* of you members (and for that > matter, any non-members present who wish to speak), to come forth with your > opinion. > > There should be more to being a member of LLG than to admit your > attendance at these meetings once a year, and then fall silent while we > slowly work through an agenda that largely passes without comment or > objection. (It seems to me that if no one at all objects to anything that > is proposed, it strongly suggests that we aren't being very bold in our > proposals. Or worse, that nobody even cares.) > > So please, speak up. > Speaking as an LLG member (and indeed Vice President!), i.e. in a (somewhat chafing) role in which I've taken on shared responsibility for furthering the best interests of Lojban, here are my thoughts. I had hitherto thought that LLG should elect an active Board that ensures that CLL stays in print, that BPFK progresses towards its goal, that CLL is appropriately updated, and that Lojban.org and other key infrastructure keeps going, and, ideally, that yields a President and Vice President who will actively foster new initiatives that benefit and command the support of the lojbanist community. However, most of the key stuff is being done by Robin, Selpahi, Gleki independently of the Board, and all evidence is that the community doesn't feel the need for the sort of active President and Vice President I described above. So a more realistic conception of LLG and the Board, at least for the time being, is that they tick along with no more activity than necessary for satisfying their legal duties. I would therefore suggest that when it comes to electing the Board, the candidates be invited to indicate how they would carry out the role if elected, and whether they'd be interested in the Pres/VP roles. For candidates who don't accept that invitation, it is probably safe to assume their complete inactivity if elected. That way the character of the Board can be determined jointly by the will of the LLG members and the qualities of the candidates. My review of the current Board: Robert LeChevalier. Greatly diminished energies but very dedicated. Riley Martinez-Lynch. Indispensable - diligent and sound of judgement. And Rosta. Reasonably assiduous participant in discussions but -- consistent with his own promises -- contributes nothing more. Arkadii Balandin. [Gleki] Extremely industrious but also of extremely eccentric judgement. Craig B. Daniel. Reasonably assiduous participant in discussions, within the rather stringent availability constraints that at the outset he declared. Ali Sajid Imani. Wholly inactive. Timo Paulssen. Wholly inactive. For an active Board, I'd recommend Riley, plus someone new, in leadership roles, plus Lojbab and Gleki in non-leadership roles, and probably not the rest of the current Board. For an inactive Board required to do little but show good judgement if ever called upon, add Craig. Of course there's a whole slew of other, highly estimable, Lojbanists who could (and should) be added to an active or inactive Board, if they were willing to be candidates. --And. > > --047d7beb9f3ca1240e0527163ab2 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On 16 December 2015 at 22:34, Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - = LLG <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
So that t= ime is not wasted, I would like the membership to discuss what they think L= LG should be doing with regard to Lojban, both in terms of goals and activi= ties.=C2=A0 You can look to the Bylaws as to the scope of what we are allow= ed to do, but what we actually do, is primarily determined by you-all as vo= ting members, and by the activities of the larger Lojban community that you= represent.

I would love to see *each and every one* of you members (and for that matte= r, any non-members present who wish to speak), to come forth with your opin= ion.

There should be more to being a member of LLG than to admit your attendance= at these meetings once a year, and then fall silent while we slowly work t= hrough an agenda that largely passes without comment or objection.=C2=A0 (I= t seems to me that if no one at all objects to anything that is proposed, i= t strongly suggests that we aren't being very bold in our proposals. Or= worse, that nobody even cares.)

So please, speak up.

Speaking as an LLG= member (and indeed Vice President!), i.e. in a (somewhat chafing) role in = which I've taken on shared responsibility for furthering the best inter= ests of Lojban, here are my thoughts.=C2=A0

I had = hitherto thought that LLG should elect an active Board that ensures that CL= L stays in print, that BPFK progresses towards its goal, that CLL is approp= riately updated, and that Lojban.org and other key infrastructure keeps goi= ng, and, ideally, that yields a President and Vice President who will activ= ely foster new initiatives that benefit and command the support of the lojb= anist community.

However, most of the key stuff is= being done by Robin, Selpahi, Gleki independently of the Board, and all ev= idence is that the community doesn't feel the need for the sort of acti= ve President and Vice President I described above. So a more realistic conc= eption of LLG and the Board, at least for the time being, is that they tick= along with no more activity than necessary for satisfying their legal duti= es.

I would therefore suggest that when it comes t= o electing the Board, the candidates be invited to indicate how they would = carry out the role if elected, and whether they'd be interested in the = Pres/VP roles. For candidates who don't accept that invitation, it is p= robably safe to assume their complete inactivity if elected. That way the c= haracter of the Board can be determined jointly by the will of the LLG memb= ers and the qualities of the candidates.

My review= of the current Board:
Robert LeChevalier. Greatly diminished energies but ve= ry dedicated.
Riley Martinez-Lynch. Indispensable - diligent and sound of j= udgement.
And Rosta. Reasonably assiduous participant in discussions = but -- consistent with his own promises -- contributes nothing more.=
Arkadi= i Balandin. [Gleki] Extremely industrious but also of extremely eccentric j= udgement.
Craig B. Daniel.= =C2=A0Reasonably assiduous participan= t in discussions, within the rather stringent availability constraints that= at the outset he declared.
Ali Sajid Imani. Wholly inactive.
Timo=C2=A0Paulssen.= Wholly inactive.

For an active Board, I'd recommend Ril= ey, plus someone new, in leadership roles, plus Lojbab and Gleki in non-lea= dership roles, and probably not the rest of the current Board. For an inact= ive Board required to do little but show good judgement if ever called upon= , add Craig. Of course there's a whole slew of other, highly estimable,= Lojbanists who could (and should) be added to an active or inactive Board,= if they were willing to be candidates.

--And.


--047d7beb9f3ca1240e0527163ab2-- --===============2927138143074662209== 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 --===============2927138143074662209==--