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

From: Robert LeChevalier <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 05:21:17 -0400

At 08:35 PM 7/24/02 -0700, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
>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.

I can say it, but I don't understand it as being "support". Maybe I've 
been Sapir-Whorfed into thinking that e'osai ko sarji la lojban is asking 
for something more than "I think Lojban seems like a good idea."

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

I'll try.

> > >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.

Yes. And I know what the words mean. But I don't know how it gets a 
dictionary done. That will take people USING the web forms, and then it 
will take some way to get from data base to printed dictionary. I'm sure 
each of these can happen. I'm not sure either WILL happen.

> > >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 said that I think we now have enough to pay off that loan. We might or 
might not have enough money in the bank to operate thereafter. We would 
not have money to pay back people who might ask for their balances back, 
but I'm not seeking donations for that - if we can't cover it through 
"profit" then people who ask for their balance back will get it from me.

> > 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.

It's been said at many LogFests. But the bottom line is that the grunge 
work has to be done by someone.

>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 the money for the photocopying. I am REALLY chinzy with LLG money.

> > 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.

The point of the committee chairpersons is that they were supposed to do 
the coordination and contacting so it wasn't dependent on me and Nora. If 
a committee chairman needs to be reminded, no work has been saved.

>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.

So have I. The committees are the members delegating things away from me 
so I DON'T worry about them.

Responsibility tends to hang heavy on me, as you may have noticed. %^)

Be that as it may, I think this will be more productive and positive than 
the last LogFest. Maybe more so with some of the stuff gotten off our 
chests in advance.

lojbab

-- 
lojbab [email-masked]
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org