Salutations!

[la .eris.]

Coi rodo,

The future of the BPFK is currently being discussed in the Members Meeting. Instructions on how to get there can be found on the main Lojban google group. I and others have made various proposals, which are now being discussed.

FAQ

Why is your post in English? You do realize this is a Lojban language mailing list?

I don't speak Lojban fluently.

Does that mean that you're here to destroy Lojban, add malglico, and install your own pet proposals by dictatorial fiat?

fu'e Of course it does. I have come here because I want Lojban to be a language only I will enjoy using. I'm attempting to trick you all into adopting my proposals so that happens. fu'o xo'o

Seriously? You really want all of that?

Of course not. I do have some proposals I like, but none of them are particularly original, and most are straight up copied (with attribution of course, should I actually get a chance to propose them) from others who are more experienced. I'd like to make CAI part of UI, for instance. I don't want to rewrite the language or question its basic grammatical principles. Actually, I support backwards compatibility (as a goal, at least) and maintaining tradition. I'd just like for there to be some active body where such proposals can be considered and adopted, and the BPFK, in its current form, is not fulfilling that goal.

What is your actual proposal?

I want to establish an English language RFC process. An RFC, or request for comments, is a process where anyone can submit a proposal to create or update a standard (in this case, Lojban). The proposal is then open for public comment. Finally, a decision is made, usually by a committee, like the BPFK. I'd also like to open up membership in the BPFK (or the replacement, if it is replaced) to people who aren't fluent speakers. There are several people who really want to be involved in the process and can probably manage not to break everything (like, for instance, me). Including mi'a might perhaps bring in some new perspectives not currently represented on the committee. The exact way the RFCs are run would need to be worked out, although I have strong opinions on the subject (to use GitHub, for one). I would also like to better organize work on the CLL and catch it up to the current language standards, among other things. I have some ideas for that too, like the BPFK owning the CLL GitHub repository. For more details, please join the meeting chat.

Thank you,

mi'e .eris.

[la .eris.]

Coi rodo,

I just spent half an hour writing out a long post with lots attitudinals and humor and the like, but it appears to have disappeared into the ether, so this will be rather brief. There is currently discussion at the LLG Members Meeting about what to do with the BPFK. Instructions for how to get to that meeting are posted in many places. A summary of my proposal follows.

I want to create an RFC process, whereby anyone could make proposals (in English) for changes to Lojban. There would then be public discussion and a decision by some body, possibly the BPFK and possibly someone else. I'm not some radical who wants to change everything. Almost all of the language change proposals that I particularly want done aren't of my creation. For instance, I'd like to merge CAI into UI. I also kind of like the NOIhA proposal and the indicator ko'oi, among other such changes. I don't want to add malglico or ruin everything; I just want somewhere that language change could happen (with peer review and at least semi-official adoption, not just by adding an experimental cmavo and waiting to see if they catch on without any hope of them ever entering the official language). The details of the RFC process haven't been determined yet, although I have some strong opinions (to use GitHub, for one).

I would also like to open up membership in the BPFK to people who aren't fluent. There are some people, like me, who haven't become fluent in Lojban yet, but would still like to have a voice in language discussions and can still be trusted to participate productively without breaking everything. This would mean that discussions would be in English, which is really a necessity anyway, since the RFCs would be in English and not everyone submitting ideas would be able to speak English.

I'd also like to get documentation, including the CLL, up to date. I propose that the BPFK (or its successor) assume responsibility for maintaining documentation. There are several people who have expressed interest in participating under something like my suggestion, and I expect that some of them will also help update documentation if that is part of the job. 

This is not the original posting of my proposal, and many arguments and counterarguments have already been raised. I hope you will join the meeting and comment, or become active there if you are currently present but inactive.

mi'e .eris.

[Gleki Arxokuna]

.i xu do djuno le du'u la .lojban. cu pamei le'i bangu be fi le si'o tavla be'o poi ro cmima be bypyfyky. cu jai se curmi fai le ka tavla fo ke'a

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bpfk-list+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[guskant]

coi la eris

I once insisted that any non-fluent lojban speakers may join BPFK:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bpfk-list/SXxIpMLgL5s/6aS8ec5oCgAJ

I wrote:

i pe'i lo tcini no'u lo nu kakne lo nu pilno la lojban cu na'e sarcu lo nu me byfy kei sei ku'i ka'e banzu tcini

i lo canaiba pilno be la lojban cu .e'a kansa mi'o lo nu jdice fi lo ka bangu 

i la'a lo ji'a no'e tavla fo la lojban cu kakne lo nu jimpe lo lojbo jufra kei sepi'o lo fanva tutci a lo vlaste

Translation:

I think that the condition of ability of speaking lojban is not necessary for being a member of bpfk, though it can be a sufficient condition.

I allow that our activity of defining the language property is accompanied by people who don't but will do use lojban.

Perhaps people who don't speak lojban much have also the ability of understanding lojban statements using translation tools or dictionaries.

To say more precisely, I don't oppose myelf to using English for discussing the structure of lojban, both about syntax or semantics.

I am not very fluent in English, but I can use dictionaries for participating the discussion.

The difference is only that who has difficulties in participating the discussion: ones who are not fluent in lojban, or ones who are not fluent in English. I belong not to the former but to the latter, but I will allow to discuss in English, because fluent English speakers are majority among lojban users, while fluent lojban speakers are minority among lojban users.

However, please be noted that I oppose myself to using English for defining lojban words. I once wrote the reason why the lojban words must be defined by lojban:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/hAfNwSdXl4A/iiIA8XV9C9gJ

As for using Github, I suggested it in an LLG meeting when I was a member of it. It is a good method, but you need to define clearly who are responsible for pulling requests, adding a member, defining the power of each member. Otherwise the result will be similar to the unsystematic group organized by some unknown volunteers: https://github.com/lojban . They once published a feature under discussion as if it were an official feature.

mi'e la guskant