From arntrich@stud.ntnu.no Fri Nov 29 07:42:43 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: arntrich@stud.ntnu.no X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 29 Nov 2002 15:42:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 66825 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2002 15:42:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 29 Nov 2002 15:42:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO brev.stud.ntnu.no) (129.241.56.70) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 29 Nov 2002 15:42:42 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brev.stud.ntnu.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBE0113EE75 for ; Fri, 29 Nov 2002 16:41:43 +0100 (CET) Received: from puma.stud.ntnu.no (puma.stud.ntnu.no [129.241.56.183]) by brev.stud.ntnu.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id E915213F09B for ; Fri, 29 Nov 2002 16:41:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (arntrich@localhost) by puma.stud.ntnu.no (8.11.6/8.10.0.Beta12) with ESMTP id gATFfgJ31150 for ; Fri, 29 Nov 2002 16:41:42 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: puma.stud.ntnu.no: arntrich owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 16:41:42 +0100 (CET) To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Official Statement- LLG Board approves new baseline policy In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20021126233258.0333f540@pop.east.cox.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS perl-11 From: Arnt Richard Johansen X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=810685 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojbo On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Bob LeChevalier-Logical Language Group wrote: > As indicated in the statement, we are seeking ratification of the Lojban > community and not merely official voting members. The poll on yahoogroups > lojban-list is set up as indicated. Those who prefer can reply to the poll > question: > >Do you support the new Lojban baseline policy statement posted to the list > >and found at http://www.lojban.org/llg/baseline.html? > via email to baselinevote@lojban.org I agree on the vast majority of the points in this statement. I must, however, ask the board for a clarification on the mandate of the baseline compliance committee, in particular the following paragraph: > In the long term, this committee should become an independent entity not > under the jurisdiction of the LLG Board or membership, although the Board > or members might retain the right of consent to proposed members of this > committee. The implementation of this independence should await the > capability of fluent language communication on all matters regarding the > language, since discussion in Lojban should be a fundamental principle for > the operation of such an independent standard entity. This seems to imply that the committee is *not* intended to be dissolved as soon as the 5 year freeze has ended. What is the justification for keeping a prescriptive body alive after the design phase of the language has ended? What is the *current* stance of the LLG board towards natural evolution of Lojban once the design phase has ended? Has the express policy of the LLG ever *been* to leave the language to its speakers so as to let it evolve naturally? I was under the impression that this was the case, but now that I'm trying to find official quotes to back up this assumption, I can't find anything. Is the policy changed in this matter? Arnt Richard Johansen http://people.fix.no/arj/ Someone just called to say he loved you?!