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>
 <UNsy1s00c56Cr6M01Nszhp> <56E1F54E.3040501@lojban.org>
To: llg-members@lojban.org
From: Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org>
Message-ID: <56EF1C47.6060900@lojban.org>
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2016 17:55:19 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <56E1F54E.3040501@lojban.org>
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
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: <llg-members.lojban.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/options/llg-members>,
 <mailto:llg-members-request@lojban.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/private/llg-members/>
List-Post: <mailto:llg-members@lojban.org>
List-Help: <mailto:llg-members-request@lojban.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members>,
 <mailto:llg-members-request@lojban.org?subject=subscribe>
Reply-To: llg-members@lojban.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; Format="flowed"
Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org

Quoting my starting post to reiterate the last line below, which is =

being totally ignored.  I can't be the only one who got confused trying =

to figure out what-all was being discussed.

On 3/10/2016 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 Robin
> edition (anyone know the current status?) and whatever the next version
> is 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
> high enough priority so far.  (There will be some new proposals under
> New Business that could cost more money than we currently take in.)

...

> The floor is open for discussion of these topics and/or other things
> that might be considered Old Business (discussed in previous meetings
> being the key factor).  Please use subject lines to keep things straight
> if multiple topics are being discussed.

Most of the discussion, it seems to me, has more or less been about =

topic A), which helped me eventually figure it out (I think).  mukti has =

said that he has some specific ideas on topic D) which he is holding off =

for now.

I think that mukti has made two motions, and both have been seconded.  I =

do not see any other motions, nor any amendments or request for them.


1. "Since we may now vote to affirm BPFK=92s findings on =93dotside=94, I m=
ove =

that we do so."

2. "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."

For 2., the conditional probably requires that selpa'i actually say that =

he accepts, but I won't hold up the motion waiting for that.

Discussion on either motion can continue if desired, but if I see no =

explicit objection, or an explicit request to hold up either question =

for additional discussion, then both motions will be considered approved =

after end of day next Wednesday (23rd).

Because those are the questions formally on the floor, I reiterate the =

request that discussion of other Old Business topics be distinguished by =

a different subject line.  Because I suspect that there is in fact no =

objection to either motion, I have no problem with additional =

topics/motions being put on the floor, as long as they are distinguished =

in the subject lines.  (This is an experiment in hopes of keeping the =

meeting moving, and somewhat more alive than it has been).

Bob LeChevalier
President and chair.


_______________________________________________
Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@lojban.org
http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members