Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: New Members, Board of Directors, other LogFest results

From: Robin Lee Powell <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 20:35:39 -0700

On Wed, Jul 24, 2002 at 05:21:58PM -0400, Bob LeChevalier wrote:
> At 10:15 PM 7/23/02 -0700, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> >On Tue, Jul 23, 2002 at 08:42:43PM -0600, Jay F Kominek wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2002 at 08:27:55PM -0400, Bob LeChevalier wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm trying to get people to accept the idea of working on the dictionary
> > > in a sane, community-based fashion, with special tools designed to ease
> > > the burden.
> >
> >I would like to publically state that I think this is an excellent idea,
> >and I would be very happy to see the LLG throw some kind of support at
> >it, even if it was just, "Yeah, that seems like a good idea, it would be
> >great if you did that".
> 
> As President of LLG, I approve of almost EVERYTHING that people do
> with Lojban. I'm not sure what additional "support" that LLG can
> provide, 

I just told. I *just* told you. Right above.

<sigh>

Explicit verbal support of lojbanic projects. In public. I think it
would count for a lot.

> given that we are without money, and I have no more power or ability
> to recruit volunteers than you guys do (and looking at the wiki, so
> far, I suspect probably LESS power and ability).

The weight of authority is an important encouragement.

> >I'm also very happy with what I've seen so far of Jay's work on
> >dictionary tools, discouraged though he may be.
> 
> I'm happy that he is doing something, even if I have no clear idea on
> what he is doing or has done. 

He's writing software to allow collaborative work on the dictionary
through a web form. This has been said several times in this thread.

> I don't know that there is anything I can do more.

And I just told you what there is you could do.

> > > (And that would likely make it significantly easier to get
> > > donations, if people saw what their donating was going to do.)
> >
> >No kidding. Sorry, lojbab, but I'm not going to give money to cover
> >expenses incurred by the organization years before I even heard of
> >it.
> 
> Umm, which expenses are those? The cost of publishing CLL ($17,500)

That's the one.

> So LLG needs to cover no old expenses.

This directly contradicts things you've said earlier. In fact, it
derictly contradicts the rest of the paragraph (the LLG still owes you
money, doesn't it?).

> >I *will* give money to produce a textbook or dictionary, because
> >that's actually *doing* something, even if the money ends up going to
> >those same debts.
> 
> I presume that at LogFest we will decide to officially publish Nick's
> books, and that will be what we will be asking for donations to
> finance, not any old debts. 

<nod>

Once again, I would like to point out that something can be made
official without publishing it.

> > > So Delegate. What on earth have you got to lose?
> >
> >The above bears repeating.
> >
> >lojbab, you have been both refusing to delegate and failing to do the
> >work for the entire time I've been involved with the project. It needs
> >to stop.
> 
> I don't think I have "refused" to delegate *anything*. What precisely
> haven't I delegated that people want to do? 

In particular, we tried to get you to break up the address re-writing
last year. I have said this several times in the thread.

> What, in fact, can I *stop* people from doing if they start doing it
> on their own, which I've more or less given blanket permission to do?

I'm specifically asking you to move from "more or less given blanket
permission" to explicit encouragement.

> Meanwhile I have to admit that being responsible ONLY for business
> matters, while keeping the organization running, quite thoroughly saps
> my motivation to do other stuff that needs to be done and that I want
> to do. 

I am honestly deeply sorry to hear that.

> Contrary to your image of me, I've always been a "team" worker, and am
> far less productive when I work totally alone. Lojban exists largely
> because Nora, Tommy, and I worked as a small team for several months
> plugging away at the gismu making. The original grammar was a similar
> effort with me and Jeff Taylor, and the later grammars drew John Cowan
> in pretty much replacing Jeff, and adding his own new interests. I'd
> like nothing more than to have a good language task like the
> dictionary, and someone who was really going to work on it with me
> over the long haul to get the job done.

This is the first time I've heard you say that. Maybe that's part of
the problem?

> I agree that I've been failing to get work done. Unfortunately,
> passing tasks along to someone else who won't get the work done only
> means that it is harder to recover the pieces when things fall apart.

I disagree.

If, for example, you photocopied all the various address sheets and
handed out copies, nothing would be lost if people didn't work on them,
except a few minutes to photocopy.

> And every year the membership has appointed individuals and committees
> who have volunteered to do this and that, and every single committee
> has been forgotten within a month of LogFest, seldom even
> communicating once, usually leaving me to pick up the pieces when I
> prepare for LogFest the following year. 

Given that the minutes were *just* posted, and you have not, as far as I
know, sent out any reminders, I can't see why you're surprised.

I don't think a monthly e-mail to all comittee heads asking for status
would be a hard thing. I, personally, have complete forgot what
committees I might or might not be on.

> But the membership has been regularly delegating things to
> anyone-but-lojbab, and will probably do some more of it again this
> year, and that is fine by me. That is your right and power as the
> representatives of the Lojban community.

<sigh>

I'd really rather not have rights or powers. I like to have comfortable
collaboration. And I would like basic verbal (well, written) support
from the LLG in that. That's all I want.

-Robin

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ BTW, I'm male, honest.
le datni cu djica le nu zifre .iku'i .oi le so'e datni cu to'e te pilno
je xlali -- RLP http://www.lojban.org/