Jump to content

apw9900

Resident
  • Content Count

    57
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by apw9900

  1. It looks like this thread has reached it's end point. Hence, it's time to let it slide down the list and vanish into oblivion. My initials claims was about the relationship between the LEA Committee and the LEA Bylaws. And to put it briefly I did accuse the LEA Committee for behaving like a school book example of an oligarchy with no respect for the LEA Bylaws. Some of you backed me up in that accusation, and some of you claimed that everything the LEA Committee did was in accordance with the bylaws. And on the whole the discussion we all had was courteously. I would like to take the opportunity to thank you for that. During our discussions other aspects of LEA also was mentioned. And I do have a feeling that there is some wondering about the way LEA works. So though I wrote that the thread would vanish into oblivion, it's my hope that some of you will keep raising questions about LEA and the way it's run if you meet members of the LEA Committee and/or you meet the artists on the LEA sims on your travels in Second Life. I for sure will. Because if we do nothing then nothing will be changed. But if we do then perhaps LEA eventually will turn into the LEA it originally was intented to be. Have a nice weekend all :-)
  2. I would never have thought that I would live long enough to agree with something you posted, Livio, but this post actually makes a lot of sense even to me. And I also do agree in what you stated in another posting about Second Life art scene needing LEA. So do I believe. Upcoming artists shouldn't spend time fundraising to get a sim for a period. LEA could, if run in the right way, be a wonderful starting place for upcoming artist to use and experiment with.
  3. I actually do believe that Lexbot's statement about a "perpetual committee that has no interest or incentive in bringing in fresh blood (and new views) doesn't sound like the best recipe for quality control either" was meant about bringing fresh blood (and new views) into the committee itself and not about new artists. But I may be wrong about that.
  4. At least the decision wouldn't be in the hands of an oligarchy.
  5. For heavens sake, Livio. This thread is about LEA. Hence, I was talking about LEA sims. When I had my gallery I too let other artists use my land for their art, so I know all about that. But now we are talking about LEA sims. Keep focus or leave the discussion.
  6. Sometimes you read my posts like the Jehovah's Witnesses reads the Bible. You don't read what I write. You read what you think I write. It's not about getting likes on Facebook. The voting process could be something like the way you vote for the Second Life 'Avi Choice Awards' where Second Life residents actually have to log in to vote.
  7. But the way it is now the definition and decision of 'good' art is in the hands of only 6 people. They, and only they, has the power to decide which artists will get a sim to work on.
  8. One more time just for you then: Members of the LEA Committee are recruited and chosen by members of the LEA Committee. Turning granting of sims into an election (like the way a member of a city council is chosen) would force the artist to promote his or hers ideas to get votes. That could be by using Facebook, Twitter and other social media. And by having rallies in Second Life. By doing so more people would be aware of what LEA is - and it might even bring more visitors to the sims. And the same goes for election of committee members. They too would have to convince those with an interest for art that they deserve to have a seat in the committee. And if they do a good job they can even get a second term. LEA needs a good portion 'glasnost' and 'perestrojka'
  9. Since one (1) current member of the LEA Committee has had a seat in the committe ever since LEA was founded in 2010 in spite of the two term policy, each and every decision made after 2014 has been invalid due to the LEA Bylaws, as he at the time was and still is an illegal committee member according to the LEA Bylaws. And that also includes altering the very same bylaws. That, I find is a problem.
  10. Oh, you can be sure that this is not 'Troll Art'. I am seriously concerned about the lack of transparency and democracy in the way LEA is managed by the LEA Committee. To me the LEA Committee very much looks like a school book example of an oligarchy. And I believe you earlier asked what I would suggest to change in the way LEA works. I actually have a few suggestions to that: 1) Members of the LEA Committee should be recruited through a public election. 2) All residents in Second Life should be able to run for a seat in the LEA Committee based on their ideas and visions. 3) Summary minutes of all committee metings should be public. 4) A list of all applicants for a LEA sim should be published on the LEA website. 5) Residents of Second Life votes for the artist they would like to see on a LEA Sim. Those suggestions would open LEA to a broader public. The candidates for a seat would be chosen on basis of their visions and ideas, and would have to promote themselves. Applicants for a sim would have to promote their ideas to a broader public in order to get votes. That way LEA wouldn't be a closed party for the few but would open up to the world and involve everyone with an interest for Second Life art. And it shouldn't be that hard to make those changes. It's just a question of will.
  11. You wrote: "Read well the papers, and you can discover that what you say is ***not true***." I read the papers and couldn't find it. And then I asked you to point me to the right place. But instead you started a rant that would make Donald Trump envious. Wouldn't it just have been easier if you gave me a link to what you know and I don't know?
  12. The only way to go directly to Linden Lab is by old-fashioned snail-mail. And sending a letter from Denmark to Californien may take forever. And in case of missing response you will not know if the letter disappeared on it's way or just got ignored. And then you can start all over again. So that is really not an alternative. But with a little luck a thread like this will eventually reach some one that will look into the matter - or better, make others raise questions to the way LEA works.
  13. A lot of insults but no documentation for your claims. Kind of says a lot about you, doesn't it?
  14. And still no documentation for you claims. Instead you are slowly sinking down to the level you accuse others to be on when it comes to argumentation. Should I take that as a sign that you were bursting out steam and not facts? Why don't you go paint another landscape painting. I am sure that some one somewhere can do with one more. And if you put a duck and a deer in it not a single eye will be dry ;-)
  15. And now even distraction instead of providing proof for your claims. Come on, Livio. you can do better than so.
  16. I am still waiting Livio, for you to back up your claims with facts. But all I hear is you to trying to prevaricate.
  17. I can only second your opinion regarding SaveMe Oh and her art. I too find that she is amazing. And we have been co-working on several occasions in Second Life. But have in mind that the topic of this thread has nothing to do with SaveMe Oh. And it might be dangerous to bring her name into the discussion as it may take the thread off topic being about SaveMe Oh and not the LEA Committee. SaveMe Oh does tend to get all attention when her name is brought up :-D
  18. So you can't deliver documentation for your claims :-) Never mind, Livio. The last time you stood up for LEA against me you were granted a sim of them. I am pretty sure you have been noticed this time too and have made yourself eligible for yet another sim for 6 months ;-)
  19. The only way you can be a part of LEA is by invite from the LEA Committee. I have from time to time tried to get in dialog with LEA. But they are not happy about questions about the way LEA is run. In June last year I posted the attached question in the LEA Facebook group. I never got an answer. Instead I immediately got ejected and banned from the group. That made me curious about LEA and I started to look closer into the way LEA was run. I spoke with a lot of the artists I had in my Josef K Galleria dell'Arte and bit by bit I realized that something was not right in the way LEA was working. If LEA had nothing to hide, or if everything in the LEA Committee was run by the book then they had no reason to ignore my question and eject me from the group. They could simply have given me an answer. And we wouldn't have been here today.
  20. Then please tell me where it states in the bylaws that changes can be made and decisions can be taken as long as the committee has a member who is not supposed to there according to the bylaws. Or the committee doesn't have the sufficient members as stated in the bylaws. Earlier you asked me to show some documentation for my claims. Now I ask you to deliver the same.
  21. Any changes to the bylaws that may have been made by the committee for the last 6 years is invalid. And that is so because at least one person of the board had exceeded his term while the changes was decided.
  22. None of the 3 members in question has at any point been moved to Ex Officio status for the required 4 months. They have all just kept their seat in the committee, regardless of the bylaws. And, to repete myself, for more than a year there has been less than 7 members of the committee. That too is a violation of the bylaws. And finally, any changes to the bylaws that may have been made by the committee for more than a year is invalid. And that is so because at least one person of the board had exeeded his term while the changes was decided.
  23. If you read my very first post that started this thread then you will actually get the full story. It's all about the LEA Committee and the mandate they administer. I am off to work now and won't be able to respond to any questions until later this afternoon.
  24. Well Livio, I will 'cut it out in paper' for you then, as we say in Denmark. If you look at this page, you will see the current LEA Committee: http://lea-sl.org/about/lea-committee If you look at this page, you will see the LEA Bylaws before they were removed from their site: http://web.archive.org/web/20160216054505/http://lea-sl.org/about/lea-bylaws And if you look at this page, you will be able to look at the LEA Committee for the years 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017 by clicking on each year. And by doing so you will notice that three (3) names occurs in all 5 years. They should only have been in the committee 4 times as they appear first time in January 2013: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://lea-sl.org/about/lea-committee Then look at this page and do the same: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Linden_Endowment_for_the_Arts_Committee Then you will notice that one (1) member of the current committee has been a member in each and every LEA Committee each and every year since 2010. I have done my recearch, Livio :-) And that proves my point that: 1) For more than a year there has been less than 7 members of the LEA Committee. The Bylaws states that there must be a minimum of 7 members. 2) Three (3) members of the LEA Committee has exceeded the two term policy stated in the LEA Bylaws. Hence, the LEA Committee hasn't been competent to transact business for quite some time according to their own bylaws. And that, and only that, is what my problem with the LEA Committee is about.
×
×
  • Create New...