Received: from localhost ([::1]:42151 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1awY7F-0003s7-AJ; Sat, 30 Apr 2016 09:51:37 -0700 Received: from mail-ob0-f173.google.com ([209.85.214.173]:35567) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1awY7A-0003rw-Fh for llg-members@lojban.org; Sat, 30 Apr 2016 09:51:36 -0700 Received: by mail-ob0-f173.google.com with SMTP id n10so61614136obb.2 for ; Sat, 30 Apr 2016 09:51:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=MOdBz+ypuNqrDLEENHomfkU5c04HWm6plbjBEC0pOzM=; b=NG/5ZUAzIY5oqWL85CYMBV3kLVWbbtBd9sKJjCAKu1dSi7/tyU2GY5E7dQxFuZq8BZ Aox+Q5bo1amD9OU8xtdEpnc+KGwGotmHLhckImb0WXstB5Vdfnjf7UlFzWgl8ORUIoXQ ZoJXSA/30nwFSziJTI2X8x+j8vaJjqHGtyPQL3haTYWU5+pGcJdZ/eZ7EkonzMgyj+Jy bzK4lpPBl2+/VBaGVL1KIXVEH2Ony7tzvTOQo4oS2dwZkxZDvlhLRcOWHGo9r/42ojNj RworUD3+ZsDbEXCs7SvWKgHmGKOhCmQmK4NU9v+Sk2wop5T4TQ3FTWiXz3UMSkeBzM6F xVuA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=MOdBz+ypuNqrDLEENHomfkU5c04HWm6plbjBEC0pOzM=; b=DtO1gva4bJjWJl+Gf/rsRt9jXewIBorjJ966/gDhZaZmx2vPyfcSt+mYZ3vGwmZz8u t11X7m4DudMpN9XiDuUaNkGGG+4pWQ1+br/l/pxEU2W7BChesncAvgOC/p6Xz5nrFwHL RNblL228JulDsypfyRjQnbBMswgShb+LaCfIB46Vt+O2s0GfEtPAJ3qfvB4ONrcoY3WD FA4xpAUh7hANFmkm0RdCE7nWrReK6p4L/t8rRbsqXWXn5TXWl1UnPS0KE4DCcsUFHHXU XAqP/KZ18IXNOunxCRvjxZeS+5nGfhNT+6kuje/Q7UNbWz1rg9ydw4EYTZaEoF1hE/IM sTzQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FV8lRZ6Xeumy18WeePhWl7F0+4kfPlINQs5j1QYR5uafChZk7+q65jJox4cpvW+lEN4XwxlGaepCcTt5Q== X-Received: by 10.182.86.162 with SMTP id q2mr11709537obz.77.1462035086450; Sat, 30 Apr 2016 09:51:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <571EA53F.6040906@lojban.org> <2A767C1B-DA0E-49F5-931C-1F61D5ECDD86@gmail.com> <15C48E81-1622-494E-B351-F5EA656D38F7@gmail.com> <5720FF17.2050307@lojban.org> <20160430142247.GB18825@mercury.ccil.org> In-Reply-To: <20160430142247.GB18825@mercury.ccil.org> From: Craig Daniel Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2016 16:51:16 +0000 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="===============2293483746646756519==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============2293483746646756519== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04447177fa25b90531b691bb --f46d04447177fa25b90531b691bb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Mostly I'm wondering whether creating a new position requires a bylaw change, or if we can just move that the position now exists. On Sat, Apr 30, 2016, 10:23 AM John Cowan wrote: > Craig Daniel scripsit: > > > I strongly support the notion of a community manager position. To > > that end, I request the opinion of our parliamentarian on what would > > be required to make it happen, because I don't feel I fully know. > > I'm not sure what you're uncertain about. Someone makes a motion, > someone else seconds it, it's discussed, a vote is called, and if a > majority of the legal votes cast are in favor, it passes. The motion > can itself appoint the first community manager, or it can delegate the > actual appointment to someone or something else, including the LLG itself, > in which case another motion (now or later) would be in order. > > -- > "Well, I'm back." --Sam John Cowan > > _______________________________________________ > Llg-members mailing list > Llg-members@lojban.org > http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members > --f46d04447177fa25b90531b691bb Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Mostly I'm wondering whether creating a new position req= uires a bylaw change, or if we can just move that the position now exists.<= /p>

On Sat, Apr 30, 2016, 10:23= AM John Cowan <cowan@mercury.= ccil.org> wrote:
Craig Danie= l scripsit:

> I strongly support the notion of a community manager position. To
> that end, I request the opinion of our parliamentarian on what would > be required to make it happen, because I don't feel I fully know.<= br>
I'm not sure what you're uncertain about.=C2=A0 Someone makes a mot= ion,
someone else seconds it, it's discussed, a vote is called, and if a
majority of the legal votes cast are in favor, it passes.=C2=A0 The motion<= br> can itself appoint the first community manager, or it can delegate the
actual appointment to someone or something else, including the LLG itself,<= br> in which case another motion (now or later) would be in order.

--
"Well, I'm back."=C2=A0 --Sam=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 John= Cowan <cowan@ccil.o= rg>

_______________________________________________
Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@loj= ban.org
http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-membe= rs
--f46d04447177fa25b90531b691bb-- --===============2293483746646756519== 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 --===============2293483746646756519==--