Received: from localhost ([::1]:51369 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1av7Iq-0006Mg-Vz; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 11:01:41 -0700 Received: from mail-yw0-f170.google.com ([209.85.161.170]:33826) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1av7Ie-0006IS-IY for llg-members@lojban.org; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 11:01:38 -0700 Received: by mail-yw0-f170.google.com with SMTP id j74so24272761ywg.1 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 11:01:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=disposition-notification-to:return-receipt-to:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:subject:from:date :to:message-id; bh=C9qJdV4k1+8JDGHW5SpfMefNbg2+1x75gMx8dV/1SsM=; b=jH4G+jaiySIyk/h2l8nufSnVzGX0ubafXttQiJwxzFV1aLEu5tC2sF+GGpyz4TxY05 5XScBQCBuKiwomDNY4AxE4+JXjuZH6x0eYqpAfQFoceIvVDesQdm4xXwLiOuq/ZyQQuR r6kReYUuj0nYVSancsZ0xEcSsa9JMBSxo11wAo6ZpgP099q6LKxDIcS+GMq3gDYakvBy b/Q8o4FFqo/ZrsaTgDsOWXwjp6XYqiuKPVamNbHQpffapNdFKEAqO23zIejUFo8zvASY JfItiJfsayELVY5As/iHih1qL5Jf+NFSX3BkzOU8eJ9Wa53uJy/xh5GaNEFnIw2dvzZe FNHA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:disposition-notification-to:return-receipt-to :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :subject:from:date:to:message-id; bh=C9qJdV4k1+8JDGHW5SpfMefNbg2+1x75gMx8dV/1SsM=; b=Alj36BHwp1egZrG+wKr+QA8pMaY1TV8bmBkbeZIo3WCSyHMTOCbRo8DakXAy2t49iS nBvYiaKMShof2p1adgatKIjzGqKbUdgfaHZWkLhJglvGiLCj4HI7cjIE3oMrN67YJ6bY L3Eqd0g5g8ze4vLcTzQzTt52LXJfB/0xZou09WWcl7aaHney3SkipYevZ4AoRw2Q90q2 yGyIdwobcn9TyQUomyhEaAgaXCNQRYfb8b3oyyCazx6yW4COzQmJcVNoKTupv9zNNEj+ R+HFfolW+zG3ky1AHX/zepBApi3JLnNhOiILdLHr9oWMQejk1R9zYZdK1e4WwyovGZ3D uJDw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FWAyHUErNUQYqcEaIoBVv27GswBjcXT+44chI7xPNIFoavhDn9WRBv6ZQXrbXyqLQ== X-Received: by 10.129.106.9 with SMTP id f9mr2176953ywc.90.1461693682379; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 11:01:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2600:1003:b841:b6f1:2c5f:6bc4:c84:f65e? ([2600:1003:b841:b6f1:2c5f:6bc4:c84:f65e]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e6sm15827638ywd.23.2016.04.26.11.01.21 for (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 26 Apr 2016 11:01:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <571EA53F.6040906@lojban.org> <2A767C1B-DA0E-49F5-931C-1F61D5ECDD86@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Karen Stein Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 14:01:19 -0400 To: llg-members@lojban.org Message-ID: <15C48E81-1622-494E-B351-F5EA656D38F7@gmail.com> 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="===============8466363717799450320==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============8466363717799450320== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----RZYX840ZIYL4GY28GQ2H09LTO42KST" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit ------RZYX840ZIYL4GY28GQ2H09LTO42KST Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On April 26, 2016 1:13:38 PM EDT, Gleki Arxokuna wrote: >2016-04-26 20:08 GMT+03:00 Karen Stein : > >> Done this way excludes some people from the possibility of >participating >> during the discussion. >> > >It certainly does not. IRC won't replace the meeting this way. Only >shrink >the time needed for other members to form a position. > > I did not say it prevented discussion, only that it precluded some people from active participation in any that happened in IRC. Third means members WILL form positions (as you yourself said) before everyone has a chance to contribute their thoughts. > >> If they have to wait until the discussion has been basically been >> completed on IRC before being able to participate them their comments >will >> not hold the same weight. >> > >Your weight as a member of LLG is the same as of others. You misunderstood. I was using myself as an example, not saying that my specific comments held more weight. Anyone not part of the IRC discussion can read the transcript, but their comments will be out of context at the best and ignored at worst. >As one of the people probably in this position I will say I would be >less >> invested and feel less like being involved in the meetings. In this >case I >> believe that going with the slower, more inclusive methods of >discussion is >> necessary. > Instead of limiting discussion to a couple of hours at most by IRC why do we not continue to use this listserv approach and have time limits for discussion of a week or so? Everyone can contribute within their own schedule and respond to the comments of others, the discussion will be completed our someone can move for an extension of necessary. The meetings will still not drag on and on, but everyone will have an equal opportunity to sway others. Also, it will be easier for all of us in that we will know when to expect emails. . karis. -- Karen Stein -- ------RZYX840ZIYL4GY28GQ2H09LTO42KST Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On April 26, 2016 1:13:38 PM EDT, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote:
>2016-04-26 20:08 GMT+03:00 Karen Stein <comcaresvcs@gmail.com>:
>
>> Done this way excludes some people from the possibility of
>participating
>> during the discussion.
>>
>
>It certainly does not. IRC won't replace the meeting this way. Only
>shrink
>the time needed for other members to form a position.
>
>

I did not say it prevented discussion, only that it precluded some people from active participation in any that happened in IRC. Third means members WILL form positions (as you yourself said) before everyone has a chance to contribute their thoughts.

>
>> If they have to wait until the discussion has been basically been
>> completed on IRC before being able to participate them their comments
>will
>> not hold the same weight.
>>
>
>Your weight as a member of LLG is the same as of others.

You misunderstood. I was using myself as an example, not saying that my specific comments held more weight. Anyone not part of the IRC discussion can read the transcript, but their comments will be out of context at the best and ignored at worst.

>As one of the people probably in this position I will say I would be
>less
>> invested and feel less like being involved in the meetings. In this
>case I
>> believe that going with the slower, more inclusive methods of
>discussion is
>> necessary.
>
<snip old messages >

Instead of limiting discussion to a couple of hours at most by IRC why do we not continue to use this listserv approach and have time limits for discussion of a week or so? Everyone can contribute within their own schedule and respond to the comments of others, the discussion will be completed our someone can move for an extension of necessary. The meetings will still not drag on and on, but everyone will have an equal opportunity to sway others. Also, it will be easier for all of us in that we will know when to expect emails.

. karis.
-- Karen Stein -- ------RZYX840ZIYL4GY28GQ2H09LTO42KST-- --===============8466363717799450320== 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 --===============8466363717799450320==--