Hej,

Agado ekster UEA ne konkuras sed kompletigas

"...iuj* aktivuloj de UEA forte kritikis la agadon de ESF kaj aliaj similaj fondaĵoj, kiuj subvencias Esperantajn projektojn, sed estas ekster la strukturoj de Universala Esperanto-Asocio..."

Incredible. They (=UEA) are somewhat sorry - manic/durchgeknallt, ĉu ne?

*"Iuj"?

ĝp,

UEA is an organization, not a person.

UEA has many members. All of these members have different opinions. Therefore some active UEA members may stand up and express their opinions, and maybe other active UEA members will disagree strongly with those opinions.

For me UEA organization looks like an organization with whip/Fraktionszwang. Some are rumbling and some went into internal immigration but follow-up with that organisation.

Anyway, not my kind of thing and not worth to spend money on it.

That's the problem with organisations not clamping down on their opinionated members - gives the impression that those members represent the entire organisation.

(UEA then proceeds to clamp down...

"That's the problem with organisations clamping down, you can't join it and have an opinion to yourself, and you lose the diversity of opinions and have one guy's opinion forced on everyone else")

qwertz:
"...iuj* aktivuloj de UEA forte kritikis la agadon de ESF kaj aliaj similaj fondaĵoj, kiuj subvencias Esperantajn projektojn, sed estas ekster la strukturoj de Universala Esperanto-Asocio..."

Incredible.

Yes, it's difficult to understand why anyone should criticize the work of ESF. Lernu might never have been created without this foundation. And they support various other useful projects, too.

According to the reports at Libera Folio, the UEA is a bit lost at the moment. The number of members falling, people are confused about its direction and exact purpose etc...

I don't know why the UEA doesn't just offer support to Lernu and other online projects such as 'vortaro.net'. If people saw that the UEA was involved in supporting useful projects, then they would feel more inclined to be members. The only good thing they seem to offer at the moment is the book service, although the webpage for this could do with a major revamp. Yes, they also arrange the big international conferences, but many people can't afford to go to these so it doesn't really affect them.

I also think the UEA should actively fund work on establishing Esperanto words for the more specialist fields. For example, business language. As we don't have a huge number of Esperanto speakers in the world, there are loads of grey areas when it comes to expressing certain specialist matters. Work on this kind of thing would really push Esperanto forward dramatically.

Chainy:I also think the UEA should actively fund work on establishing Esperanto words for the more specialist fields. For example, business language.

I think they do have a commission on terminology but I am not sure.

Normally I would say that this kind of specialist terminology should be treated by the various committees and sub-organizations devoted to those topics, like the Komercista Esperanto-Unio [Commercial Esperanto Union].

... but a friend of mine visited their meeting at UK and found that most of them spoke very poor Esperanto and struggled to express even simple thoughts, so clearly most of their members are not in a position to be developing new terminology.

I wonder whether the critics were sympathisers of organisations like Esperanto Civito, or like-minded people, who feared that such anarchy would undermine the prospects for their "empire". What short-sightedness. We should rather be concerned for those who lack enthusiasm for La Espero!

Miland:I wonder whether the critics were sympathisers of organisations like Esperanto Civito, or like-minded people, who feared that such anarchy would undermine the prospects for their "empire".

No, I think not. If I understand their viewpoints correctly, they believe that most or all Esperanto activities should take place under the UEA umbrella. They see the creation of independent organizations are competitors to UEA. That is particularly the case when referring to the foundation Esperanto Internacia, which is the other independent foundation that was presented in the same hour as ESF. The loud cries of protest came because these individuals felt that independent organizations are duplicating activities that UEA already supports, and that by soliciting donations, these other foundations are taking money away from UEA.

E@I's position, as I explained in the article, is that there is no duplication of effort, because UEA doesn't do the things that ESF does. People should give money to causes that they support. If they want to support scientific research on Esperanto, and websites like lernu.net, they should send money to ESF. If they want to support UEA's programs to teach Esperanto in Asia (or some other project), they should give to UEA.

The opinion of the UEA's loud proponents in the audience was that if we wanted money to support lernu.net, we should have asked UEA for it, and it would have been given.

In fact, E@I has made many requests to UEA for money, and these requests have always been refused. In the session in question, I stood up and said this. One of the UEA people said that UEA could not provide the funding.

"Ne volas", ["doesn't want to"] I replied
"Ne povas!!" ["can't!!"] was a loud chorus of responses from a few people.

After the meeting, I did have a conversation with some of these UEA people, and I believe the truth came out; "ne devas" ["doesn't have to"] seemed to be the real verb they were looking for. Essentially it seemed like these UEA folks thought that there is no need for the UEA to give any kind of support to lernu.net, because ESF already supports it. Therefore it seems disingenuous to me, for them to suggest that people shouldn't give to ESF, when they are not ready to give any of their own financial support to projects like lernu.

Of course I did meet many lovely UEA members at UK, and I'm a member myself, but the people at the meeting were not the only ones that I encountered who told me that they didn't want to give to ESF because they "support UEA". It's not a reason, to me, but clearly they see ESF as a competitor. Perhaps they see it that way because ESF has achieved so many concrete results with its money, and I haven't seen so much in the way of concrete results from a lot of UEA activities.

Hahaha, I love this.

So basically, "ne volas, ne povas, ne devas" is their motto?
If that's the case, there shouldn't be any surprise that people want to support other organisations, especially ones supporting lernu! since the internet seems to be near-universally recognised as being a massive boost to the EO community (I wouldn't have found out about it otherwise!).

Perhaps that could be combined with teaching EO in Asia or whatever they want.

No, "ne volas" was what I said. So technically their motto would be "ne povas, ne devas".

UEA claims some degree of credit for lernu by including information on lernu's progress in their annual report. But in fact they haven't donated a single cent to the project!