Re: What is official? (Was: [lojban] Why is there no noodle gismu?)

[Craig Daniel <craigbdaniel@gmail.com>]

On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 10:10 AM, selpa'i <seladwa@gmx.de> wrote:
> la .lojbab. cu cusku di'e
>>
>> Ian Johnson wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 6:37 PM, Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder -
>>> LLG
>>>
>>>     kanpe ki'a
>>>
>>> {kanpe} is a (the?) BPFK-recognized experimental gismu,
>>
>>
>> Never heard of it.
>>
>> BPFK hasn't recognized any experimental gismu, or even the possibility
>> of experimental gismu.  There hasn't even been a procedure defined for
>> doing so (nor has the BPFK even been authorized to make changes to the
>> language other than as necessary to complete the baseline documentation,
>> though that authorization is foreseen, and the BPFK itself has the power
>> to decide what is "necessary").
>>
>> The *only* change to the language that BPFK has recognized is xorlo.
>
>
> Does "recognized" mean accepted as official? As far as I can tell, not even
> xorlo is immune to changes or future no-votes. From the "BPFK Procedures"
> page:
>
> "A poll is attached to the proposal page, where people vote to indicate
> their approval of the proposal. Voters may change their vote at any time."
>
> Anyone who was allowed to vote back then can change their mind and vote no
> today, so technically, the BPFK has not made any final decisions about
> anything. Yet, xorlo seems commonly accepted (though not generally liked)
> and gets described as "official".
>
> (The xorlo proposal got changed relatively recently, in December 2011.)
>
> I think it's problematic to cling to a baseline that is over a decade old.
> Lojban has evolved considerably in the meantime, and doing it this way, the
> documentation might never catch up.
>
> mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

Right now xorlo is alone in having a *very* special status that is
more official than just "the BPFK likes it" and is, by design, hard to
add anything to. It's the first thing that was a big enough deal that
the BPFK membership (at least those with strong opinions on the
matter) was pushing for its immediate adoption, but many people felt
that as different parts of the BPFK's work will interact with each
other it is inappropriate to adopt a final baseline until we are ready
to do so for the entire language at once.

The compromise was to establish an interim baseline to the baseline
policy, consisting of things the BPFK feels fairly certain will end up
in that final baseline and that the membership sees as worth embracing
now. It's hard to add anything to the interim baseline, and that's
quite deliberate; the notion was that the interim baseline should only
reflect what changes the Lojban community feels unusually confident
about. Here's the official text of the ZG policy, as added to the BPFK
procedures at the 2007 LLG annual meeting:

"Any proposal which at least half of the BPFK membership has voted on
in a tentative vote with none voting against, may be submitted by the
BPFKJ to the general membership as a possible piece of the zasni
gafyfantymanri ("interim baseline", herein after referred to as the
ZG).  Such a proposal requires a two-thirds majority of those voting
to vote in favor of it at the general membership meeting in order to
pass.

Voting something into the ZG has the following effects:

1. The proposal will be considered correct Lojban until such a time
the complete new baseline is established and approved by the
membership. Usage according to the CLL standard will not be considered
incorrect, but usage according to the ZG will be preferred.

2. The BPFK will recognize that such a vote indicates a desire by the
membership for the proposal in question to be included, in modified
form if necessary, when the new baseline is finished. Such a desire
will not be considered binding in any way.

3. The membership is encouraged to use the ZG standard in all
pedagogical contexts, and in all Lojban conversation.

The ZG will last only until the entire new baseline is written by the
BPFK and approved by the membership."

Thus far, xorlo is the only item that has ever been brought to the
membership for inclusion in the ZG (and, indeed, is the specific thing
this was written to allow us to make official to some degree), but the
procedure exists to add even more. (The "tentative vote" term refers
to the fact that all BPFK votes are tentative until the one about the
final baseline.) It is my firm hope that the BPFK is able to complete
its mission in a sufficiently rapid fashion that there will be little
if any need for more ZG material, but quite frankly I would vote in
favor of most reasonable proposals that made it past the first hurdle
(unanimity among BPFK members) and I imagine many other LLG voters
would do similarly. Still, I find it highly improbable that a proposal
to create new gismu will receive the support of a supermajority of the
LLG.

 - mi'e .kreig.daniyl.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.