Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [llg-members] Official Statement- LLG Board approves new baseline policy

From: Robert LeChevalier <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 16:49:55 -0500

At 02:56 PM 11/27/02 +0000, And Rosta wrote:
>[I've removed crossposting; restore it in the reply if you see fit]
>
>A couple of questions.
>
>First, does a vote in favour count as a vote in favour of the general thrust
>of the document, or as support (or lack of dissent) for every detail of it?

The reason for the vote is that we are seeking a mandate for the baseline 
policy as described in the statement, and for the byfy as described, as a 
means of finalizing the baseline. How much you want to insist on "details" 
vs "approving of the general thrust" is up to you. A high proportion of 
yes votes will be taken as such a mandate. There is not likely to be 
further discussions on the details unless the community votes disapproval.

>Second, I have a query about the following passage:
>
># The language design freeze will last for a minimum 5 years after its
># initial declaration, and may be extended on a year by year basis until such
># time as discussion of language problems, and potential changes to fix
># those problems, is substantially discussed in Lojban by skilled users of the
># language. When that situation is deemed to occur, the question of
># maintaining the baseline, or terminating the freeze in the language
># prescription will be turned over to the Lojban-using community.
>
>Is it saying that (a) the freeze will be for a minimum of 5 years and

Yes, 5 years *from the date in the future when the byfy is done* (not from 
today).

>(b) thereafter, LLG will decide how long it continues,

Probably, the voting membership at the annual meeting as we approach the 
end of 5 years will be asked to decide whether to renew the freeze for an 
additional year, and if so, this will be repeated each year until the 
members decide otherwise. The baseline will not be open-ended as per one 
interpretation of the old policy - after 5 years there will be some sort of 
vote, and the extensions will be for a single year at a time.

>and (c) once
>discussion is mainly in Lojban by skilled users, LLG will abdicate its
>powers vis a vis the baseline and freeze?

That is (and always has been) the intent as approved by the Board of the 
present, and I will support such myself in the future, but the decision 
will be up to the voting members at that time, as to what LLG will or won't 
do. I have little doubt that once we have a solid Lojban-speaking 
community, there will be no more need for a formal freeze/baseline than 
Esperanto has, and the language prescription will have approximately the 
same force that the Fundamento has on Esperanto - keeps in mind the core of 
the language as it originated, but actual usage often deviates in minor 
ways from Zamenhof's designs. The community itself will be the real 
normative force, and not the prescription.

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