Received: from localhost ([::1]:45087 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1auZzv-0001hL-AT; Sun, 24 Apr 2016 23:27:55 -0700 Received: from mail-lb0-f182.google.com ([209.85.217.182]:33088) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1auZzp-0001gT-7G for llg-members@lojban.org; Sun, 24 Apr 2016 23:27:53 -0700 Received: by mail-lb0-f182.google.com with SMTP id jj5so21916892lbc.0 for ; Sun, 24 Apr 2016 23:27:49 -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=atIUSMKAHW0wrEEyLLw03JYv7Ni1ibN3iQYmqaYnEmM=; b=Hv4hJFt7vNW/IPIxK/xMYJbqWPDMVDAwkXuWnuqFE9FaanIRNCxb5Svy62FiYWhAZ7 UWhWJ4XQgGGmO4v82yx0KEWJtKgfdJwLpeOBUJnvoglEK27ktaMZBfOvyW1jK5Db7B9P DjWWbp6CJQRBR6fVcZwjR+Ca4N23TXOWYvp7FXmPFDH4C0AmISfon9/IiABVcqGS9wmB SSYRAC0NQm4ORmqOWVRAZbo2jWvkXslpoV6EigJtYMpN0EgttmLlTy+Eqhclj2zA565T x+x7kumQj3eLhwB7uBv+3/J312M6N34Br6zZSpPZSDR8MAPSQ1Cdgt5FC3yCt4LWkb4H 8VTg== 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=atIUSMKAHW0wrEEyLLw03JYv7Ni1ibN3iQYmqaYnEmM=; b=TbeXwDMiLA0ifr5Ij58PR3Q5lnhhYyARJV8H1QcPMcGjzBwISEw4Uvo9nbhGDGKNyP Y9eeSWaon+aNvduzOc18FWFQ8BT0nz+zQr7s6H9f7U45WqHPsAqrLN6HCQGPqnqLjKOv zutGXUq39KHqVtSSgi9VNEbAIOKFDKTUshc4LMQSBO6frJYNaxrlsR77cBEYBLIWlhDj +YTgl3rs36n1EAK1KngxlQfMzgi4JtXS4HzwnqpMwjlKmVJfu7bBOt4QTHKYIYYoa/l3 5ccw+TDQEzEQX4w1qsYnjnPEcEKz8wCbu3VGvVp2Dmwv9/88p2qv0u9DL0Rc1NOfpZOM 7PRQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FUo8hlwVMfhF2PfdHkxiT5pu9moNqPLpY1YHdXAJHhbrqgUwWh6cBo4d1N0ihDEnrKR8XXw0cR1garO1A== X-Received: by 10.112.157.66 with SMTP id wk2mr11432242lbb.53.1461565662499; Sun, 24 Apr 2016 23:27:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.112.144.229 with HTTP; Sun, 24 Apr 2016 23:27:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <288926CD-33BD-4E49-A8D4-E7B77DB8CB02@gmail.com> References: <288926CD-33BD-4E49-A8D4-E7B77DB8CB02@gmail.com> From: Gleki Arxokuna Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 09:27:02 +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] Community Manager position? 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="===============6773060473014980295==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============6773060473014980295== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c32484211a0f053149468f --001a11c32484211a0f053149468f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 2016-04-25 4:38 GMT+03:00 Karen Stein : > In response to the idea of holding discussion by email and then voting vi= a > IRC I have a few comments. First, I don't believe that discussion done > outside the official meeting by email will work well unless it is done th= e > way this discussion now is so everyone sees and can respond to what > everyone else posts. If it's done this way then my question is why change > it to outside the meeting? > > I am hesitant about voting via IRC. > I also think it's a bad idea. In IRC people could make initial agreements and then only confirm their position by commenting to a resume of IRC discussions posted to this mailing list. > I don't know about everyone else, but my life is complicated enough that > having a meeting at a single time could easily be when I am not available > regardless of the time. I don't even know in advance when I will or will > not be free. Surely other people, members now or in the future, will face > the same issue. Voting by message, within a specified period of time, > solves the problem. > > It seems the main concern here is that this meeting has lasted so long. W= e > all know that a major factor in this has been lojbab's health. Since he i= s > actively looking to be replaced as president I don't see that the issue > will be as much of a problem in the future. > > . karis. > > On April 24, 2016 11:59:09 AM EDT, Riley Martinez-Lynch < > shunpiker@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> With the motion to adjourn defeated, I=E2=80=99m picking up from lojbab= =E2=80=99s email of April 16: =E2=80=9CNew Business, anyone?=E2=80=9D >> >> On March 18, I moved that we accept BPFK=E2=80=99s report on dotside and= on March 24 it was deemed to have passed without opposition.I don=E2=80=99= t think that further action is required, but someone please object if this = is not correct. >> >> I agree entirely with selpa=E2=80=99i: It=E2=80=99s not helpful for LLG = to micro-manage a web site that is almost exclusively powered by volunteer = efforts. >> >> I regret that guskant and gleki are at odds about the maintenance of the= web site. Both of them have invested a lot of time into expanding and the = content and keeping it fresh. In the case of gleki, he also administered th= e LMW before it became the official site, so perhaps any confusion about hi= s role comes from privileges that carried over after LMW became the main we= b site. >> >> My understanding is that as Secretary, the maintenance of pages >> that are deemed official fall under my responsibilities. I have not made= an effort to police changes to those pages, but most just to see that page= s that are unambiguously =E2=80=9Cofficial=E2=80=9D are tagged as such, and= receive updates when the membership or board takes actions. >> >> I think gleki deserves credit for picking up the slack administratively.= He has taken care to empower other members of the community to administer = the wiki and various other online initiatives that he has started. I don=E2= =80=99t always agree with his decisions, but they are often decisions that = someone needs to make. When we have disagreed, I have found that we have be= en able to reach compromises. >> >> I think it makes sense to formalize that role, not to =E2=80=9Cdeprive= =E2=80=9D gleki or anyone else of various powers, but to distribute respons= ibilities with greater transparency and accountability. I can image such a = position having a title such as =E2=80=9Ccommunity manager=E2=80=9D, entail= ing the administration of LLG=E2=80=99s >> various social media accounts, and the day to day operations of the web = site. This would be distinguished from the pre-existing =E2=80=9Cweb master= =E2=80=9D position, which appears to include the administration of the web = servers, supporting databases, domain registration and name service. >> >> Unless there is an immediate consensus on such a position, as well as a = candidate to fill it, I recommend that we defer actionable discussion until= the 2016 meeting. >> >> I may have already mentioned this, but I would favor changing the way we= run meeting to something along the lines of what lojbab proposed, with dis= cussion of the agenda happening in email before the meeting, and then the a= ctual business of the meeting in an IRC session. The Language Creation Soci= ety does it this way, and having observed one of their meetings, I think it= =E2=80=99s a model worth emulating. It would definitely help us to keep to = a more manageable schedule. >> >> =E2=80=94Riley >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Llg-members >> mailing list >> Llg-members@lojban.org >> http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members >> >> > -- Karen Stein -- > > _______________________________________________ > Llg-members mailing list > Llg-members@lojban.org > http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members > > --001a11c32484211a0f053149468f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


2016-04-25 4:38 GMT+03:00 Karen Stein <comcaresvcs@gmail.com&g= t;:
In response to the idea o= f holding discussion by email and then voting via IRC I have a few comments= . First, I don't believe that discussion done outside the official meet= ing by email will work well unless it is done the way this discussion now i= s so everyone sees and can respond to what everyone else posts. If it's= done this way then my question is why change it to outside the meeting?
I am hesitant about voting via IRC.

I= also think it's a bad idea. In IRC people could make initial agreement= s and then only confirm their position by commenting to a resume of IRC dis= cussions posted to this mailing list.
=C2=A0
I don't know about everyone else, but my life is = complicated enough that having a meeting at a single time could easily be w= hen I am not available regardless of the time. I don't even know in adv= ance when I will or will not be free. Surely other people, members now or i= n the future, will face the same issue. Voting by message, within a specifi= ed period of time, solves the problem.

It seems the main concern here is that this meeting has lasted so long. We = all know that a major factor in this has been lojbab's health. Since he= is actively looking to be replaced as president I don't see that the i= ssue will be as much of a problem in the future.

. karis.

On April 24, 2= 016 11:59:09 AM EDT, Riley Martinez-Lynch <shunpiker@gmail.com> wrote: 
With the motion to adjourn defeated, I=E2=80=99m pick=
ing up from lojbab=E2=80=99s email of April 16: =E2=80=9CNew Business, anyo=
ne?=E2=80=9D 

On March 18, I moved that we accept BPFK=E2=80=99s rep=
ort on dotside and on March 24 it was deemed to have passed without opposit=
ion.I don=E2=80=99t think that further action is required, but someone plea=
se object if this is not correct.

I agree entirely with selpa=E2=80=
=99i: It=E2=80=99s not helpful for LLG to micro-manage a web site that is a=
lmost exclusively powered by volunteer efforts.

I regret that guskan=
t and gleki are at odds about the maintenance of the web site. Both of them=
 have invested a lot of time into expanding and the content and keeping it =
fresh. In the case of gleki, he also administered the LMW before it became =
the official site, so perhaps any confusion about his role comes from privi=
leges that carried over after LMW became the main web site.

My under=
standing is that as Secretary, the maintenance of pages
that are deemed official fall under my responsibilities. I have not made an=
 effort to police changes to those pages, but most just to see that pages t=
hat are unambiguously =E2=80=9Cofficial=E2=80=9D are tagged as such, and re=
ceive updates when the membership or board takes actions.

I think gl=
eki deserves credit for picking up the slack administratively. He has taken=
 care to empower other members of the community to administer the wiki and =
various other online initiatives that he has started. I don=E2=80=99t alway=
s agree with his decisions, but they are often decisions that someone needs=
 to make. When we have disagreed, I have found that we have been able to re=
ach compromises.

I think it makes sense to formalize that role, not =
to =E2=80=9Cdeprive=E2=80=9D gleki or anyone else of various powers, but to=
 distribute responsibilities with greater transparency and accountability. =
I can image such a position having a title such as =E2=80=9Ccommunity manag=
er=E2=80=9D, entailing the administration of LLG=E2=80=99s
various social media accounts, and the day to day operations of the web sit=
e. This would be distinguished from the pre-existing =E2=80=9Cweb master=E2=
=80=9D position, which appears to include the administration of the web ser=
vers, supporting databases, domain registration and name service.

Un=
less there is an immediate consensus on such a position, as well as a candi=
date to fill it, I recommend that we defer actionable discussion until the =
2016 meeting.

I may have already mentioned this, but I would favor c=
hanging the way we run meeting to something along the lines of what lojbab =
proposed, with discussion of the agenda happening in email before the meeti=
ng, and then the actual business of the meeting in an IRC session. The Lang=
uage Creation Society does it this way, and having observed one of their me=
etings, I think it=E2=80=99s a model worth emulating. It would definitely h=
elp us to keep to a more manageable schedule.

=E2=80=94Riley

=


Llg-members
mailing list
Llg-members@lojban.org
http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listin=
fo/llg-members

-- Karen Stein --

_________________________________= ______________
Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@lojban.org
http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-membe= rs


--001a11c32484211a0f053149468f-- --===============6773060473014980295== 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 --===============6773060473014980295==--