Received: from localhost ([::1]:47720 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1agvS8-0008Rc-7G; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 07:32:36 -0700 Received: from mail-wm0-f43.google.com ([74.125.82.43]:35625) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1agvS3-0008RR-4K for llg-members@lojban.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 07:32:35 -0700 Received: by mail-wm0-f43.google.com with SMTP id l68so33661431wml.0 for ; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 07:32:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=XZNcUuSo5oB5DLmsaTw09gYBRvz3QPKfNOtl3X+kwI0=; b=hNvFUrLtdrWOj9aBhgty2TFF86SOJSHzrVNdwKesVBqXj1CukiXwavQaQZxQj5Zmb+ CENKPGo8/eJt8do5QT8cxbPw4vtmINOdIcDZv5RDZjPR4gc8fj/AQzgX4rSO/ku6xIoR fcZNFCudj9jpjhkZJ8YAd9UsTqPKX4B94hXl/7EiX5qqei3eDe80y543Kyp3NO+Bk/rj jQdOHzfXc4Az8ioqJkxWQ3TtmGcdx8oV8PRyX715fqUcx/Sp9U42HhmptanFUHgr7hDF /l6wix16aiKRvlLLptL65fsryq+ZzSLG+Fun2IUvodwHZERXwpfiXd4YqbI4BPtQX9kw 5G/g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=XZNcUuSo5oB5DLmsaTw09gYBRvz3QPKfNOtl3X+kwI0=; b=VhyPWQNlpT09UluypdmsO996ugJMmKgVCzSu7D7CXKgD38zMmD2tGPP200cXV7sKDg NcBSgsjj1JR6TiYzEDHKqdSmOe0ap11C1DU/Yc+jicpORhsqhYiP/Dmr0MSWGiQ6RWDQ O6/EJcNRmGN1LGdoq7KIIkrvkTVCrAuVkftCP1hm9UkZwO0ShoXIn/94/uVtIgN4V4es ms+/zOOLJ72qUk9VYggVYe2I5qQoymOaD8tBuEHL8Dd5iomLT8JNq5v08m4ultX8GUwU /IHxxDvNMewjC72LhdL9qudqMMcA5lI3AgCrEf+w3SIszC9DQ4Nd0AYCPQa7lb0Y5Oy2 RBMg== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJJ0rZ+aLiGEk9GbMpPT07jU73oSc6iSPC6AtgIKHXB3onxDi0azXCjM2DeL3f3Mu3CV3eGKyGWQgmc2Ow== X-Received: by 10.28.103.3 with SMTP id b3mr40285632wmc.65.1458311544333; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 07:32:24 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.28.91.210 with HTTP; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 07:31:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <8BCCD0E2-E6D4-4687-9D89-D177E69E1259@gmail.com> <56DE1D83.8050901@lojban.org> <8EC7FC36-8C8F-43FD-AE6A-C704D1D9C2CE@gmail.com> <12678381.nPyR9sEY1K@caracal> <56E0AE11.8020708@lojban.org> <56E1F54E.3040501@lojban.org> From: Gleki Arxokuna Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 17:31:44 +0300 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] 2015 Annual Meeting - Old Business 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="===============1815503796459924014==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============1815503796459924014== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114a91b2926cb5052e539d98 --001a114a91b2926cb5052e539d98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 2016-03-18 17:25 GMT+03:00 Riley Martinez-Lynch : > Since we may now vote to affirm BPFK=E2=80=99s findings on =E2=80=9Cdotsi= de=E2=80=9D, I move that > we do so. Curtis, would you like to second? > > I=E2=80=99m referring specifically to BPFK=E2=80=99s clarification of the= rules for cmevla: > > https://mw.lojban.org/papri/BPFK_Section:_cmevla > > "All cmevla must begin and end with a pause or glottal stop, regardless o= f > grammatical context. The syllables la, lai, la'i and doi are no longer > subject to special restrictions inside cmevla.=E2=80=9D > I second that. > > If the chair of BPFK would accept re-appointment to that position, I woul= d > also like ask that we vote to recognize his leadership for another term. = I > am personally grateful for his work in bringing people together over the > last year, and for achieving the long-discussed goal of holding > deliberations in lojban. > I second that. > > Once that business is on the way, I=E2=80=99d like to share a few ideas a= bout the > idea of sustaining membership. But I think that may be a longer, > meeting-spanning discussion, and these two items =E2=80=93 recognizing th= e BPFK=E2=80=99s > work, and reauthorizing its chair =E2=80=93 need to happen now. > > =E2=80=94Riley > > > On Mar 10, 2016, at 5:29 PM, Bob LeChevalier wrote: > > > > We are now into Old Business. Known old business topics include > > A) BPFK status, goals, and reappointing (or not) the BPFK jatna > > B) partly subsidiary to that is the republication of CLL, both the Robi= n > edition (anyone know the current status?) and whatever the next version i= s > after that. This issue was raised with respect to the github repository. > > C) the effort led nominally by Pierre to set up some sort of skills > testing for Lojbanists > > D) we've never done anything about it, but we still have the > possibility, now authorized in the bylaws, to establish "sustaining" > memberships (nonvoting) to gain some additional funding. Of course, we > need to find something worth spending the money on - nothing has been hig= h > enough priority so far. (There will be some new proposals under New > Business that could cost more money than we currently take in.) > > > > > > For the first two topics, I personally would like the jatna's take on: > > 1) whether the PEG grammar or the YACC grammar is the official/baseline > one right now. > > 2) What, if any, parser is considered official, or at least compliant > with whatever the official grammar is. > > 3) As I've previously noted, it seems that what used to be the baseline= d > (and thus not changing) gismu and cmavo lists have been replaced by new > lists which include a whole lot of new stuff, possibly experimental (but > there is no defined experimental space for gismu). It seems that to some > people, a large number of experimental cmavo have become part of their > standard dialect. Does byfy have a plan for addressing these > proposals/changes and deciding that some are officially approved (and > therefore need to be documented in CLL and on the BYFY cmavo pages). > > 4) the jatna said that there were 8 byfy members, including And. Who > are the others and how were/are they determined (in case someone wants to > join)? I know for example that I am still on the byfy list and never > resigned. But I also make no attempt to keep up with the business, which > is entirely in Lojban. Though I probably could read a single message if = I > felt it important enough, I doubt that I have the time/interest to keep u= p > with the discussion. So am I one of the 8, but always abstaining? > > 5) Does producing a published dictionary fit anywhere in the byfy plans= , > or is this an LLG project relatively independent of the byfy (the answer = to > 3) above is relevant, and I think that byfy would need to produce real > dictionary definitions of the cmavo to at least replace those found in th= e > old cmavo list - this was after all one of the original reasons for setti= ng > up the BPFK - because I couldn't come up with good definitions and the > dictionary was never published as a result.) > > > > The floor is open for discussion of these topics and/or other things > that might be considered Old Business (discussed in previous meetings bei= ng > the key factor). Please use subject lines to keep things straight if > multiple topics are being discussed. > > > > Motions, including a motion to reappoint/confirm the jatna until the > next meeting, and to officially ratify the byfy approval of "dotside", ar= e > in order. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > --001a114a91b2926cb5052e539d98 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


2016-03-18 17:25 GMT+03:00 Riley Martinez-Lynch <<= a href=3D"mailto:shunpiker@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">shunpiker@gmail.com= >:
Since we may now vote to= affirm BPFK=E2=80=99s findings on =E2=80=9Cdotside=E2=80=9D, I move that w= e do so. Curtis, would you like to second?

I=E2=80=99m referring specifically to BPFK=E2=80=99s clarification of the r= ules for cmevla:

https://mw.lojban.org/papri/BPFK_Section:_cmevla=

"All cmevla must begin and end with a pause or glottal stop, regardles= s of grammatical context. The syllables la, lai, la'i and doi are no lo= nger subject to special restrictions inside cmevla.=E2=80=9D

I second that.
=C2=A0

If the chair of BPFK would accept re-appointment to that position, I would = also like ask that we vote to recognize his leadership for another term. I = am personally grateful for his work in bringing people together over the la= st year, and for achieving the long-discussed goal of holding deliberations= in lojban.

I second that.
= =C2=A0

Once that business is on the way, I=E2=80=99d like to share a few ideas abo= ut the idea of sustaining membership. But I think that may be a longer, mee= ting-spanning discussion, and these two items =E2=80=93 recognizing the BPF= K=E2=80=99s work, and reauthorizing its chair =E2=80=93 need to happen now.=

=E2=80=94Riley

> On Mar 10, 2016, at 5:29 PM, Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
>
> We are now into Old Business.=C2=A0 Known old business topics include<= br> > A) BPFK status, goals, and reappointing (or not) the BPFK jatna
> B) partly subsidiary to that is the republication of CLL, both the Rob= in edition (anyone know the current status?) and whatever the next version = is after that.=C2=A0 This issue was raised with respect to the github repos= itory.
> C) the effort led nominally by Pierre to set up some sort of skills te= sting for Lojbanists
> D) we've never done anything about it, but we still have the possi= bility, now authorized in the bylaws, to establish "sustaining" m= emberships (nonvoting) to gain some additional funding.=C2=A0 Of course, we= need to find something worth spending the money on - nothing has been high= enough priority so far.=C2=A0 (There will be some new proposals under New = Business that could cost more money than we currently take in.)
>
>
> For the first two topics, I personally would like the jatna's take= on:
> 1) whether the PEG grammar or the YACC grammar is the official/baselin= e one right now.
> 2) What, if any, parser is considered official, or at least compliant = with whatever the official grammar is.
> 3) As I've previously noted, it seems that what used to be the bas= elined (and thus not changing) gismu and cmavo lists have been replaced by = new lists which include a whole lot of new stuff, possibly experimental (bu= t there is no defined experimental space for gismu).=C2=A0 It seems that to= some people, a large number of experimental cmavo have become part of thei= r standard dialect.=C2=A0 Does byfy have a plan for addressing these propos= als/changes and deciding that some are officially approved (and therefore n= eed to be documented in CLL and on the BYFY cmavo pages).
> 4) the jatna said that there were 8 byfy members, including And.=C2=A0= Who are the others and how were/are they determined (in case someone wants= to join)?=C2=A0 I know for example that I am still on the byfy list and ne= ver resigned.=C2=A0 But I also make no attempt to keep up with the business= , which is entirely in Lojban.=C2=A0 Though I probably could read a single = message if I felt it important enough, I doubt that I have the time/interes= t to keep up with the discussion.=C2=A0 So am I one of the 8, but always ab= staining?
> 5) Does producing a published dictionary fit anywhere in the byfy plan= s, or is this an LLG project relatively independent of the byfy (the answer= to 3) above is relevant, and I think that byfy would need to produce real = dictionary definitions of the cmavo to at least replace those found in the = old cmavo list - this was after all one of the original reasons for setting= up the BPFK - because I couldn't come up with good definitions and the= dictionary was never published as a result.)
>
> The floor is open for discussion of these topics and/or other things t= hat might be considered Old Business (discussed in previous meetings being = the key factor).=C2=A0 Please use subject lines to keep things straight if = multiple topics are being discussed.
>
> Motions, including a motion to reappoint/confirm the jatna until the n= ext meeting, and to officially ratify the byfy approval of "dotside&qu= ot;, are in order.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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-membe= rs

--001a114a91b2926cb5052e539d98-- --===============1815503796459924014== 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 --===============1815503796459924014==--