Received: from [::1] (port=43970 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eWyFi-0003r1-Co; Wed, 03 Jan 2018 21:39:42 -0800 Received: from mail-me1aus01on0057.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([104.47.116.57]:19568 helo=AUS01-ME1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eCyxf-0006v7-VQ for llg-members@lojban.org; Thu, 09 Nov 2017 18:22:33 -0800 Received: from SY3PR01MB0873.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com (10.169.170.140) by SY3PR01MB0876.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com (10.169.170.143) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P256) id 15.20.218.12; Fri, 10 Nov 2017 02:22:16 +0000 Received: from SY3PR01MB0873.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com ([10.169.170.140]) by SY3PR01MB0873.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com ([10.169.170.140]) with mapi id 15.20.0197.022; Fri, 10 Nov 2017 02:22:16 +0000 From: Timothy Lawrence To: "llg-members@lojban.org" Thread-Topic: LLG join request Thread-Index: AQHTWcq65QSqWIQPE0+32ausfSc3/A== Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2017 02:22:16 +0000 Message-ID: References: <78156dc5-1fb3-4e9d-992c-a8f30facc4fd@googlegroups.com> , , In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-AU, en-US Content-Language: en-AU X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=timothy.lawrence@connect.qut.edu.au; x-originating-ip: [61.69.72.206] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; SY3PR01MB0876; 6:a0+lHRF3W7ajX5Mh5dUN5avq4kO1YUEza+2Sg5p+oa8aTCQq5FUhhVLeR7JlztTC6SGoCxng1GdsDYd01vkur+cEB/vp4CQVzCZaiVdUvjlOD1b2MHAkzxyr0ihsPWYXqAitizCwNvzad/G6B2vpy7oEqBhZ+NqE+8N0lSP9+9rLoIfGZ1DG5xAuId8pHPn8PJmr7bEBBqdZtQs5BY2+jAnXFp34h0na185s1rsKTPlfXwPChu5YkRwBm/huN+4SLz6IIIFPwO977WeoA7mPF7aFZVIG/+PA60xZic4zq6t7KTHlZKSfTf2fW39MGLdwdBhahnPJwI38A0AZFk+ORhdCAJeIkRMvcof5wzn1C/E=; 5:BHQpl+AScMAJhegLwmxiXFJAOHVr1qyNWxQcnzm6gnxnPYjZhWike5ydi1J9Hr02fNEXlYiLI9Chu+N2kSR6LGRE79Hmf9yAFnR392+rYJea/mriQl30NaoOUJ8CXYdC86c1z5EGh9ZPoHdC+CMxwDb5nisRw+wnlbuO7qvyfM0=; 24:3Gh1znuYVr29sF++wDsS32WaW2JQTvKroq7Vv8lcRDU93IoY+mEm1P3wXqrkq9dER1x3sZopVR+mWjK/vJ0Q3/HK2ITBvudUnZ+vchvrUKU=; 7:zZ3xMIXH3nvUTZSTHvBVKdE7P3ki16cxTe1uqTvHvMg7PvO0RGfsq+wAmRmJRKhmvpbEH6PObqjx3XPP1Zw0SGAgzwaRj0lBJACtfy+MRYfZEmrF0m7IGHeaOj+QXXXXhyCRpm+Vzy5Y6Ch4VuUIMBH7rUEZezKJHIBcboFLmafFO1F4712rb8h9SNNd6Guk+whodo+dJZ0avTnbBuuQxbKlVGO1qn1Gm3tmqw161R2p0gxtHyRl6T9QAMo8o4IB x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SSOS; x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: a20afa96-84fe-49d8-b2ba-08d527e1dcce x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(22001)(4534020)(4602075)(4627115)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(2017052603255); SRVR:SY3PR01MB0876; x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: SY3PR01MB0876: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(215639381216008)(228788266533470)(211936372134217)(54900358751275)(5213294742642); x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(100000700101)(100105000095)(100000701101)(100105300095)(100000702101)(100105100095)(6040450)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(100000703101)(100105400095)(93006095)(93001095)(3231021)(920507027)(10201501046)(3002001)(6041248)(20161123560025)(20161123564025)(20161123562025)(20161123558100)(201703131423075)(201702281529075)(201702281528075)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(20161123555025)(6072148)(201708071742011)(100000704101)(100105200095)(100000705101)(100105500095); SRVR:SY3PR01MB0876; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(100000800101)(100110000095)(100000801101)(100110300095)(100000802101)(100110100095)(100000803101)(100110400095)(100000804101)(100110200095)(100000805101)(100110500095); SRVR:SY3PR01MB0876; x-forefront-prvs: 0487C0DB7E x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(376002)(346002)(377424004)(189002)(199003)(7116003)(18926405002)(7696004)(5660300001)(6116002)(106356001)(102836003)(3846002)(50986999)(6606003)(76176999)(6916009)(2900100001)(105586002)(33656002)(42882006)(2950100002)(101416001)(54356999)(606006)(93886005)(3480700004)(81156014)(68736007)(8936002)(478600001)(81166006)(8676002)(74316002)(86362001)(34040400001)(2906002)(66066001)(7736002)(55016002)(14454004)(733005)(54896002)(6306002)(6436002)(236005)(9686003)(14971765001)(6506006)(53936002)(5640700003)(2501003)(3660700001)(786003)(316002)(16297215004)(77096006)(88552002)(97736004)(2351001)(99286004)(3280700002)(19627405001)(25786009)(966005)(74482002)(189998001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:SY3PR01MB0876; H:SY3PR01MB0873.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: connect.qut.edu.au does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: connect.qut.edu.au X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: a20afa96-84fe-49d8-b2ba-08d527e1dcce X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 10 Nov 2017 02:22:16.4545 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: dc0b52a3-68c5-44f7-881d-9383d8850b96 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SY3PR01MB0876 X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_bar: - X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 03 Jan 2018 21:39:41 -0800 Subject: [Llg-members] LLG join request X-BeenThere: llg-members@lojban.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: llg-members@lojban.org Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1088524868068657973==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============1088524868068657973== Content-Language: en-AU Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_SY3PR01MB087338CC1392A33D200592CCEB570SY3PR01MB0873ausp_" --_000_SY3PR01MB087338CC1392A33D200592CCEB570SY3PR01MB0873ausp_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, I was recommended to join LLG to help update the CLL in terms of fixing mis= types and giving similar feedback. I am a novice user of Lojban, at the moment. I hope I may be able to assist= as time allows :) Thanks, Timothy / kurji ________________________________ From: lojban@googlegroups.com on behalf of Gleki = Arxokuna Sent: Wednesday, 8 November 2017 4:56 PM To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban You can join LLG by sending a request in English to llg-members@lojban.org<= mailto:llg-members@lojban.org> In case you get no reply please report. ________________________________ From: lojban@googlegroups.com on behalf of Timoth= y Lawrence Sent: Wednesday, 8 November 2017 12:01 PM To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban > Ok, can you join BPFK committee or LLG to help us update CLL at least in = terms of fixing mistypes? Alright sure, if they are happy with a novice joining :) ________________________________ From: lojban@googlegroups.com on behalf of Gleki = Arxokuna Sent: Wednesday, 8 November 2017 12:20 AM To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban 2017-11-07 16:49 GMT+03:00 Timothy Lawrence >: "You can learn the language described here with assurance that it will not = be subject to further fiddling by language-meisters." - Complete Lojban Language http://lojban.github.io/cll/1/2/ I only use CLL Lojban. I believe that an unambiguous language needs to have= a central, singular version to stay unambiguous. I don't know much about the history of OpenGL but it, from a surface level,= seems similar to the history of C++, which I am familiar with. By and large, new features are added to the C++ language, but every version= is backwards-compatible with older versions (and almost entirely compatible with its predecesso= r, C). An older compiler might choke on new language features, but a new compiler = will always work with old code. Compiler vendors may introduce their own language features as forks (and th= ey are not considered standard C++), but there is always a standard/"strict= " mode that can be enabled. Most good features that compilers introduce hav= e been added to the official version, perhaps changed in a way to integrate= them better. This is what I think Lojban should be like. I want all new / official Lojban versions to be CLL-compatible. > "jbo_*" (imagine "jbo_FR", "jbo_EN", "jbo_CA"...), I do not want there to be "jbo_A", "jbo_B", "jbo_C"... that are all incompa= tible. I do want "jbo_1", "jbo_2", "jbo_3"..., where it's a sequential chronology = and each is a more improved (but backwards-compatible) version. A tool could explicitly support "jbo_2" and it would implicitly support "jb= o_1". If a tool just says it supports "jbo", it would be presumed to suppor= t the latest. Remember though that Lojban is not a programming language in that its gramm= ar is not fully formal, only parts of it are. It's quite possible and noted= that there can be internal bugs (even if those are mistypes in its English= documentation) that won't make Lojban "compile". > But this group ("committee"?) should accept the fact that language will e= volve, whether they like it or not. I hope that this means that they accept the language can change, by backwar= ds-compatible design and not evolution via drift. C++ does not at all "evolve" like a natural language and I don't think Lojb= an should, either. Because C++ has maintained a centralised standard and co= ntinued to update, I think it possible for Lojban to do so. > What is clear, however, is that people don't want to use CLL Lojban (desp= ite the fact that it is still the most thoroughly documented version). I do. I still don't know what it means "clear". How can person not want to use C= LL Lojban if 'ey doesn't speak it? Bad tutorials? CLL being hard to underst= and? But if we are talking about fluent speakers then does it matter what t= hey want to speak when they already speak CLL Lojban and the rest doesn't h= ave documentation? I think most people want to use the latest version of something. I see the = CLL Lojban as the latest version, for the backwards-compatibility reasons m= entioned above. I have seen CLL-incompatible versions advertised on the website and new lea= rners are likely to intuit that it's intrinsically better to choose the "la= test version", not knowing that learning the modern versions entails embrac= ing a schism. > To be frank, I feel a bit betrayed. I feel bad because my hope was that L= ojban was more that just an experiment. Someone, please, prove me it is... This is so true for me, and one of the reasons that I became more quiet (al= though I am writing an unannounced novel that contains CLL Lojban). > I just don't want to spend time learning things if they would be thrown a= way in a few months/years > sykynder: You mention re-integrating forks back into the core language. H= ow do you change something and then make it the same as it was before? I believe all official Lojban changes must be backwards-compatible for Lojb= an to succeed in its goal of being unambiguous (let alone succeed in other = ways, such as adoption). > E.g. learning a revised meaning {lo} is no big deal. It's not just about learning, it's about effort invested in writing tools, = texts, chatbots and parsers (et cetera). It's about breaking that promise in the CLL that the language will not be s= ubject to further fiddling. Introducing changes that break Lojban compatibility will - waste invested time in the older version - waste invested money in buying the older CLL (etc) - alienate those who wasted their time/money - introduce more ambiguity (The Lojban version changes the meaning!!) (Why did CLL-{le} become modern-{lo} and the modern-{le} get introduced, instead of just introducing the new {lo= } to mean what modern-{le} means and keeping CLL-{le} as the default?) well, {le} didn't become {lo} in most dialects ... As learning a revised meaning is no big deal, simply redoing these changes = to be compatible with CLL Lojban should be no big deal ;) "Lojban does not yet have nearly the vocabulary it needs to be a fully usab= le language of the modern world" - Complete Lojban Language http://lojban.github.io/cll/1/2/ If we can agree to move forward using CLL Lojban and only make backwards-co= mpatible changes, then I can personally say I'll be happy to resume devotin= g time, energy and money into Lojban. Ok, can you join BPFK committee or LLG to help us update CLL at least in te= rms of fixing mistypes? Lojban's usefulness as an unambiguous language is so important to me. It doesn't have to be "perfect" or "better", it just has to be unambiguous = and complete. I want to help complete Lojban, and any processes of governance surrounding= it, to reunite it. Thanks for reading, mi'e la timoteios. ________________________________ From: lojban@googlegroups.com > on behalf of sukender1@gmail.c= om > Sent: Monday, 6 November 2017 6:04 AM To: lojban Subject: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban Wow. This is even worse than I thought. One great thing about Lojban is that it is supposed to be unique. What I re= ad here is like if people said "Hey, I invented a Lojban-French", and "Me, = a Lojban-Chinese", and "Lojban-English"... That sounds so stupid. Let me be clear: I'm NOT judging anyone forking Lojban. Surely they had goo= d reasons to do so. Actually nobody can pretend forseeing any case, and wri= te an "immutable" language. So yes, it is obvious that the language evolves= and will evolve, even an hypothetic "official an unique" Lojban. What is unfortunate is that all forking work should be reintegrated in some= way to the "trunk", or else we'll end up with many "Lojbans" wich will act= ually kill Lojban (whatever version). I understand the lack of leadership, but it feels more like a lack of struc= tures for democraty. It would be nice to have such structures, but unfortun= ately I don't know how this could be initiated. One idea would be to mimic = software, a bit as OpenGL did, having the core, extensions, and proposals. [X] [X] To be frank, I feel a bit betrayed. I feel bad because my hope was that Loj= ban was more that just an experiment. Someone, please, prove me it is... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Goog= le Groups "lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/loj= ban/e94H-wdh5gc/unsubscribe. To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to lojban+= unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. --_000_SY3PR01MB087338CC1392A33D200592CCEB570SY3PR01MB0873ausp_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello,

I was recommended to join LLG to help update the CLL in terms of fixin= g mistypes and giving similar feedback.

I am a novice user of Lojban, at the moment. I hope I may be able to&n= bsp;assist as time allows :)


Thanks,

Timothy / kurji



From: lojban@googleg= roups.com <lojban@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Gleki Arxokuna <g= leki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, 8 November 2017 4:56 PM
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban

You can join LLG by sending a request in Engli= sh to llg-members@lojban.org=  In case you get no reply please report.

From: lojban@googlegroups.c= om <lojban@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Timothy Lawrence <timoth= y.lawrence@connect.qut.edu.au>
Sent: Wednesday, 8 November 2017 12:01 PM
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban
 

> Ok, can you join BPFK comm= ittee or LLG to help us update CLL at least in terms of fixing mistypes?


Alright sure, if they are happy with a novice joining :)


From: lojban@googlegroups= .com <lojban@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.= is.my.name@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, 8 November 2017 12:20 AM
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban
 


2017-11-07 16:49 GMT+03:00 Timothy Lawre= nce <timothy.lawrence@connect.qut.edu.au>:
"You can learn the language described here with assurance that= it will not be subject to further fiddling by language-meisters."=
- Complete Lojban Language http://lojban.github.io/cll/1/2/

I only use CLL Lojban. I believe that an unambiguous language needs to have= a central, singular version to stay unambiguous.

I don't know much about the history of OpenGL but it, from a surface level,= seems similar to the history of C++, which I am familiar with.
By and large, new features are added to the C++ language, but every= version is backwards-compatible with older versions (and almost entirely compatibl= e with its predecessor, C).
An older compiler might choke on new language features, but a new compiler = will always work with old code.

Compiler vendors may introduce their own language features as forks (and th= ey are not considered standard C++), but there is always a standard= /"strict" mode that can be enabled. Most good features that compi= lers introduce have been added to the official version, perhaps changed in a way to integrate them better.

This is what I think Lojban should be like.

I want all new / official Lojban versions to be CLL-compatible.



> "jbo_*" (imagine &= quot;jbo_FR", "jbo_EN", "jbo_CA"...),
I do not want there to be "jbo_A", "jbo_B", &quo= t;jbo_C"... that are all incompatible.

I do want "jbo_1", "jbo_2", "jbo_3"..., where= it's a sequential chronology and each is a more improved (but backwards-co= mpatible) version.

A tool could explicitly support "jbo_2" and it would implicitly s= upport "jbo_1". If a tool just says it supports "jbo", = it would be presumed to support the latest.


Remember though that Lojban is not a programming language in that its = grammar is not fully formal, only parts of it are. It's quite possible and = noted that there can be internal bugs (even if those are mistypes in its En= glish documentation) that won't make Lojban "compile".
 



> But this group ("commit= tee"?) should accept the fact that language will evolve, whether they = like it or not.

I hope that this means that they accept the language can change, by backwar= ds-compatible design and not evolution via drift.

C++ does not at all "evolve" like a natural language and = I don't think Lojban should, either. Because C++ has maintained a c= entralised standard and continued to update, I think it possible for Lojban= to do so.



> What is clear, however, is t= hat people don't want to use CLL Lojban (despite the fact that it is still = the most thoroughly documented version).

I do.

I still don't know what it means "clear". How can  pers= on not want to use CLL Lojban if 'ey doesn't speak it? Bad tutorials? CLL b= eing hard to understand? But if we are talking about fluent speakers then d= oes it matter what they want to speak when they already speak CLL Lojban and the rest doesn't have documentation?

 
I think most people want to use the latest version of something. I see= the CLL Lojban as the latest version, for the backwards-compatibility reas= ons mentioned above.

I have seen CLL-incompatible versions advertised on the website and new lea= rners are likely to intuit that it's intrinsically better to choose the &qu= ot;latest version", not knowing that learning the modern versions enta= ils embracing a schism.

> To be frank, I feel a bit be= trayed. I feel bad because my hope was that Lojban was more that just an ex= periment. Someone, please, prove me it is...

This is so true for me, and one of the reasons that I became more quiet (al= though I am writing an unannounced novel that contains CLL Lojban).

> I just don't want to spend t= ime learning things if they would be thrown away in a few months/years

> sykynder: You mention re-integrating forks back into the core languag= e. How do you change something and then make it the same as it was before?<= /span>

I believe all official Lojban changes must be backwards-compatible f= or Lojban to succeed in its goal of being unambiguous (let alone succeed in= other ways, such as adoption).



> E.g. learning a revised mean= ing {lo} is no big deal.

It's not just about learning, it's about effort invested in writing = tools, texts, chatbots and parsers (et cetera).
It's about breaking that promise in the CLL that the language will not be s= ubject to further fiddling.

Introducing changes that break Lojban compatibility will
- waste invested time in the older version
- waste invested money in buying the older CLL (etc)
- alienate those who wasted their time/money
- introduce more ambiguity (The Lojban version changes the meaning!!)

(Why did CLL-{le} become modern-{lo}
and the modern-{le} get introduced, instead of just introducing the ne= w {lo} to mean what modern-{le} means and keeping CLL-{le} as the default?)=

well, {le} didn't become {lo} in most dialects ...
 

As learning a revised meaning is no big deal, simply redoing these changes = to be compatible with CLL Lojban should be no big deal ;)



"Lojban does not yet have nearly the vocabulary it needs to be a fu= lly usable language of the modern world"
- Complete Lojban Language http://lojban.github.io/cll/1/2/

If we can agree to move forward using CLL Lojban and only make backwards-co= mpatible changes, then I can personally say I'll be happy to resume devotin= g time, energy and money into Lojban.

Ok, can you join BPFK committee or LLG to help us update CLL at least = in terms of fixing mistypes?

 
Lojban's usefulness as an unambiguous language is so important to me.<= br>
It doesn't have to be "perfect" or "better", it just ha= s to be unambiguous and complete.


I want to help complete Lojban, and any processes of governance surrounding= it, to reunite it.

Thanks for reading,


mi'e la timoteios.

From: lojban@googleg= roups.com <lojban@googlegroups.com> on behalf of sukender1@gmail.co= m <sukender= 1@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, 6 November 2017 6:04 AM
To: lojban
Subject: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban
 
Wow. This is even worse than I thought.

One great thing about Lojban is that it is supposed to be unique. What= I read here is like if people said "Hey, I invented a Lojban-French&q= uot;, and "Me, a Lojban-Chinese", and "Lojban-English".= .. That sounds so stupid.

Let me be clear: I'm NOT judging anyone forking Lojban. Surely = they had good reasons to do so. Actually nobody can pretend forseeing any c= ase, and write an "immutable" language. So yes, it is obvious tha= t the language evolves and will evolve, even an hypothetic "official an unique" Lojban.

What is unfortunate is that all forking work should be reintegrated in= some way to the "trunk", or else we'll end up with many "Lo= jbans" wich will actually kill Lojban (whatever version).

I understand the lack of leadership, but it feels more like a lack of = structures for democraty. It would be nice to have such structures, but unf= ortunately I don't know how this could be initiated. One idea would be to m= imic software, a bit as OpenGL did, having the core, extensions, and proposals.




To be frank, I feel a bit betrayed. I feel bad because my hope was tha= t Lojban was more that just an experiment. Someone, please, prove me it is.= ..

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

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Goog= le Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/lojban/e94H-wdh5gc/unsubscribe<= /a>.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsub= scribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http= s://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsub= scribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http= s://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--_000_SY3PR01MB087338CC1392A33D200592CCEB570SY3PR01MB0873ausp_-- --===============1088524868068657973== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Llg-members mailing list Llg-members@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members --===============1088524868068657973==--