[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lojban] CLL 1.1/ CLL 2.0. What is your opinion in the current situation?
v4hn wrote:
What's up with http://www.lojban.org/tiki/BPFK+Procedure and the checkpoints?
I know it says "obsolete" there, but still it is well thought out
and looks like a good infrastracture to get going again.
It WAS a good infrastructure, when we had a dozen or more people
actively working on it. But that didn't last. Everyone was doing their
own thing, because that is how this community has always worked. As a
result, any topic that was well-settled got little attention (and
continued undocumented), and things that were contentious turned into
endless discussion that distracted people from doing productive stuff
that would actually move the process along. The bottom line is that no
one had enough time (consistently over the long haul) to make the thing
work. Nick Nicolas, the original jatna, became burned out and
frustrated with the lack of progress, because even his skills weren't
enough to herd cats. Robin took over, in the absence of other
volunteers, and had only limited success.
I know the BPFK is not dead, I recognize a lot of names on the member list,
and I haven't been around for too long.
It isn't dead. It just has nothing to do as a GROUP, because there
haven't enough individuals actually doing the individual things that
need to get done, which are mostly boring and time-consuming, (or
requiring specialized knowledge).
> But it looks like that to me
because there weren't /any/ "official" announcements concerning decisions
That is because there have been no such decisions, and there won't be
any until after CLL 1.1 is done. We have to document the status quo
before we consider changes, or people won't know what is being proposed
to change.
Even then, changes will be very limited. Only what is actually broken
should be fixed prescriptively.
The language design era is supposedly done. Future change should evolve
out of usage, with changes merely serving as documentation of what
actual Lojbanists are doing with the language.
or even new official proposals
There have never been ANY official proposals since byfy started.
or any other progress within the last year.
The progress, such that it is, is whatever Robin says that it is. He
was granted essentially dictatorial powers until (at least) such time as
CLL is updated.
I only heard of a couple of draft-proposals by people who explicitly state
that they are _not_ members of the BPFK
No one is in a position to evaluate a draft proposal. And a proposal to
be considered will have to include the proposed changes to CLL among
other things. I doubt that anyone in recent years has ever written up a
proposed change with anywhere near the detail that will be expected.
and some complains about
infrastructure/tools which need fixing (jbovlaste, autoposting of texts,
TeX-problems, ...). This is no development, it's maintenance as far as I can see.
It is enabling Robin to get his job done, with as little possible
demands on his limited time.
The main job right now is editorial, and we haven't come up with a way
to farm out editorial tasks. (Perhaps if the original byfy structure
had been organized around CLL chapters rather than selma'o, we might
have learned how, but the original focus was on making decisions, not on
documenting things to any consistent standard, and the documentation
never got done.) As such, we are stuck with having one editor
attempting to get things done in his limited spare time.
lojbab
--
Bob LeChevalier lojbab@lojban.org www.lojban.org
President and Founder, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.