On Thursday, May 15, 2014 4:50:36 PM UTC-7, Wuzzy wrote:
Now that I know what this is *not* about, I would like to know what
this poll/vote/proposal/whatever is *really* about.
It seems I have missed the point.
What position and functions exactly *do* you propose for selpa'i?
You response confused me slightly.
Maybe this whole thing makes more sense to discuss if we know what
we’re actually talking about. ;-)
I'm sorry. I tried to not only explain what selpa'i would not be doing, but also what he would be responsible for. Here are a couple messages from my response:
"I hope that I can clearly convey that what is going on here is giving all the people who have an opinion on things that should change, a venue for advertising and seeking consensus on changes and mostly important a generally agreed upon mechanism for finalizing that consensus into the language. This is the role selpahi will be taking on."
"Its so very important for us to be able to distinguish between selpahi having the responsibility of merging changes into the language, and selpahi having the sole responsibility of managing the languages creative process."
And from the original message:
"However without an active leadership many of these modifications remain in conversational limbo where they are discussed for years in vain since there is no explicit mechanism for integration into the language or lexicon."
"selpa'i would be the figurehead for the re-activation of this explicit mechanism for integration. If you are familiar with software development, this responsibility is synonymous with that of a repository maintainer. In that sense, he will have the authority to merge pull requests back into the repository thereby making the change "official"."
To summarize, if the above is not illuminating, selpahi will be replacing Robin in the role of approving and making official any changes to the language.
Besides: Does selpa'i even *want* such a position? I think this point
is especially important. If not, this discussion would be really
senseless. xD
I agree it would be senseless, so I can assure you that everything I have said is only by the full approval of selpahi. If for some reason that can't be trusted, I have no doubt that selaphi will confirm since we've been in direct communication throughout this entire process.
All of that said, I personally hope we (including everyone who has approved this measure) can eventually help you see the positive pragmatism of the motion. We really believe this is what Lojban needs, not what selpahi deserves. The aim isn't to tell anyone in particular how they should use lojban, but to make lojban reflective of the ideals and usage of its modern userbase.
If anyone else has any questions, concerns, or would like to demonstrate their positive or negative disposition on this matter please feel invited to do so.