From lojbab@lojban.org Thu Jul 25 13:40:43 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_7_4); 25 Jul 2002 20:40:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 27541 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2002 20:40:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 25 Jul 2002 20:40:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lakemtao04.cox.net) (68.1.17.241) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 25 Jul 2002 20:40:43 -0000 Received: from lojban.lojban.org ([68.100.206.153]) by lakemtao04.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with ESMTP id <20020725204043.FZVI4949.lakemtao04.cox.net@lojban.lojban.org> for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2002 16:40:43 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20020725161931.033c2a70@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: lojbab@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 16:33:28 -0400 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: New Members, Board of Directors, other LogFest results In-Reply-To: <20020725182904.GC17369@chain.digitalkingdom.org> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20020725050104.00aac9d0@pop.east.cox.net> <20020723221537.B26815@miranda.org> <5.1.0.14.0.20020723025544.032cba90@pop.east.cox.net> <4.3.2.7.2.20010730221611.00b10c00@pop.cais.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20020723025544.032cba90@pop.east.cox.net> <20020723103956.E28971@miranda.org> <5.1.0.14.0.20020723195058.030913c0@pop.east.cox.net> <20020723221537.B26815@miranda.org> <5.1.0.14.0.20020724155616.032ea010@pop.east.cox.net> <5.1.0.14.0.20020725050104.00aac9d0@pop.east.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: Bob LeChevalier X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=1120595 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojbab At 11:29 AM 7/25/02 -0700, Robin Lee Powell wrote: >On Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 05:21:17AM -0400, Robert LeChevalier wrote: > > > > 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. > >Would you even accept a volunteer to take that over at this point? >Would it even be *possible* for someone else to do it? Nora has been skeptical that SHE could do it, and she lives here. I think that someone local could transition to doing it, having access to me to answer the inevitable questions. Out of area, I have been skeptical because too much of my record keeping BACKUP is on paper, and the backup is what is needed when the inevitable questions arise. There is a hump that would have to be overcome in automating/modernizing my "system", and after that, it would not necessarily need to be local anymore. Non-local, I think it would take someone with even your intensity quite a while to overcome the hump unless it was done by massively throwing things out (as in everything from before CLL) and not worrying about them (which I considered and rejected, after Cowan suggested it). My current best guess as to what should be done to transition is to pick a system, transition what we can, and solve the remaining problems piece by piece. > > >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. > >I'll give you the freaking photocopy money. Yeesh. Thank you for your generosity. Seriously, we have NOT had open pocketbooks in the last several years, and I've been not-spending in part to staunch the flow. The unpaid ISP bill is my biggest worry, and I'm not the only one to hope that CAIS going bankrupt means that they will decide that it isn't worth collecting since we will require them to properly establish the billing amount, and I don't think they can. > > >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 disagree. An e-mail once to all committee members a month takes <1 >minute of your time. This might lead to many more than 1 minutes of >work getting done. I see your point, but it is a different philosophy than was the basis for the past committees. Certainly we can do that if committees are NOT established with a "lojbab keep away" attitude. lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org 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