Received: from localhost ([::1]:36592 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eVGUf-0000Mw-P8; Sat, 30 Dec 2017 04:44:05 -0800 Received: from mail-wr0-f179.google.com ([209.85.128.179]:43522) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eVGU8-0000Kz-Uy for llg-members@lojban.org; Sat, 30 Dec 2017 04:43:34 -0800 Received: by mail-wr0-f179.google.com with SMTP id w68so31068394wrc.10 for ; Sat, 30 Dec 2017 04:43:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=69tlbiJu11KESis0YFcXH4K8p0hvQrGaVyTaiPxSLEA=; b=BtsqwgJ2RV/DMMZbpUPI92p6n7M8MEwuZFwBpzV0OhrtErW58uaBKdNxxokN1JW2rn i33so0I03VEHZZvRrHe3Ng7tnEB0Kio6bjY0N4F0UG355FMlPX/WlobpRjd3F48O3iT2 7CPlcUR+fOu6Fe04cwY9MCpyumaywc81QVARHxiVh+v0b8OVWNgjBmsEc+95fztKyeXx d0tX1PQzm4TB7skp1HMefXekivqOXICae5Adfg/etB7s0/SXQZBz2AGkYqeroCJXkOey //IZzp3621wiUE5cf4Mf3WNC42KKCRCdM36NZUdA/tzbmEx8KTXljZbt/Cmkrk7g/o/p 0pVA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=69tlbiJu11KESis0YFcXH4K8p0hvQrGaVyTaiPxSLEA=; b=awwxSpDdOSjDfWf2uMWbGGyG6LaLyd50uwsqG6MHTHPnPDO0hjsoA/TD1yS0Fj88KS x76A0s3RnqPLUSmNHB0TYIRyZHp/TTGAbkhGzPXdRSogEe0P3/cHDsSYlmxWTHgkXFBC 4EDiIj4595+RSiD7ML0ehg8l+MwfY+utcG8rV8i94Ip/OOsrBoOl1rRgNMVfCJehWxP5 gAvW+t4hzjJv6jCpH5p+5G0i6d4Jxqb6/dq1L3izel/AEANQ0CfO1MF8zf8Hsat+spAf mZYcqMGDmFLXJAbCPKiRjn8GIk9DI/oCTdYDglEP52Y7PCEXbAwBXjjHmlUZElTPbMLh NbcQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mIkZ4iR/VqsjQYTGuGKTc84nqBhNw18cxo79PlSpCGMVJVznFyG vVmRfKtIYpp0qAWEH6rm84cmxnCIu/+a7a/CyDc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBothsUxeDx/qZV74Sg3urwdiGcZ0dgM1coO04Y9pxpM2jI3vWt+N6lKq3dn35GB9CjNEv0OrSBd5QQGB+YzWSuM= X-Received: by 10.223.185.51 with SMTP id k48mr38812445wrf.270.1514637805719; Sat, 30 Dec 2017 04:43:25 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.135.147 with HTTP; Sat, 30 Dec 2017 04:43:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.135.147 with HTTP; Sat, 30 Dec 2017 04:43:24 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <7074953.2veMK8YGUJ@caracal> <6c826210-9f71-1813-2957-7e5593ad18ed@lojban.org> From: And Rosta Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2017 12:43:24 +0000 Message-ID: To: llg-members@lojban.org X-Spam-Score: -4.8 (----) X-Spam_score: -4.8 X-Spam_score_int: -47 X-Spam_bar: ---- Subject: Re: [Llg-members] Unfinished Business: BPFK 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="===============9104167408025943475==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============9104167408025943475== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045fa99a5f967705618e18fe" --f403045fa99a5f967705618e18fe Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On 30 Dec 2017 03:46, "Curtis Franks" wrote: Okay, maybe we should take on both projects (exploration and promotion of logical language in general and also, separately, the exploration and promotion of Lojban (regardless of its status as a logical language)). We might also want to create or establish a framework for the creation of a Lojban derivative which is a logical language by all previously mentioned standards. How do we do this? What proposals or orientations are actionable? I'd suggest three motions determining the principal aims of the LLG. Motion 1. A principal goal of the LLG (coequal with any other principal goals) is exploration and promotion of logical language in general. Motion 2. A principal goal of the LLG (coequal with any other principal goals) is promotion of Lojban (regardless of its status as a logical language) as defined by documents endorsed by the LLG. Motion 3. A principal goal of the LLG (coequal with any other principal goals) is creation of a Lojban derivative that is a logical language. For extra clarity, add in to each motion the definition of logical language that I gave earlier. If Motion 1 were to pass, then I'd have some modest concrete suggestions for what LLG could do (and I would apply to rejoin LLG). If Motion 3 were to pass then I'd probably have some constructive contributions to make to the ensuing discussion. --And. On Dec 29, 2017 10:30, "And Rosta" wrote: > > > On 26 Dec 2017 19:36, "Bob LeChevalier" wrote: > > The bylaws were formulated to broadly cover a variety of forms of > research into logical languages, and there has always been the possibility > of conducting or supporting such research. But to put it simply, no one has > been interested in such research EXCEPT in the form of promoting and > studying the use of Lojban. > > That statement is patently false and wilfully amnesiac. > > I was for many years the most vocal proponent of the LLG's mission to > explore logical language, as opposed to the mission to promote Lojban. As a > member of LLG and the Lojban community I eventually changed my position, > but this was because it became increasingly evident to me that the two > goals (of exploring and promoting logical language, versus promoting > Lojban) are in fact antithetical; within LLG and the Lojban community, a > victory for the one goal can be achieved only through the defeat of the > other; but success in the goal of promoting Lojban can be achieved only > within LLG and the Lojban community, whereas success in the goal of > promoting logical language can be achieved outside it; many promoters of > Lojban (as opposed to logical language) have invested much of their life's > work in the enterprise, and pursuing the failure of another's life's work > should be avoided where possible; therefore LLG and the Lojban community > should be left to promote (conservative) Lojban unopposed (and therefore > must not be required to promote logical language). > > > Indeed, there is a strong antipathy to other "logical languages", which > I admit to sharing; I'm simply not interested, and never have been - > languages are too hard for me to learn, and IMHO too difficult to properly > "invent" with the complete full documentation needed for new people to > learn and use them. So I hope selpa'i will forgive me if I don't look at > his own efforts at a new "logical language". > > This is all true, except that the Lojban that Lojbab endorses is not a > logical language, for all that it might falsely advertise itself as such. > > The antipathy Lojbab describes exists because Lojban seeks to accrue users > and promotes itself by falsely claiming to be a logical language. Any > logical language is therefore a rival to Lojban. And Lojban's false claim > to be a logical language, coupled with its comparative fame, is an obstacle > to -- a distraction from -- the promotion of logical language. > > > > > So LLG can adopt such research, if some LLG members want to do so, but > until then LLG considers supporting Lojban to be the best way to promote > the purposes described in the Bylaws. > > > Again, patent bullshit. > > > While I would be only too delighted for the LLG to promote the purposes > described in the Bylaws, that would entail deprecating Lojban in its > baselined and current forms. Given that LLG recruits from the Lojban > community rather than from the logical language community, it is obviously > and not unreasonably the case that the large majority of LLG members > prioritize the promotion of Lojban over the promotion of the purposes > described in the Bylaws. > > --And. > > _______________________________________________ > Llg-members mailing list > Llg-members@lojban.org > http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members > > _______________________________________________ Llg-members mailing list Llg-members@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members --f403045fa99a5f967705618e18fe Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On 30 Dec 2017 03:46, "Curtis Franks" <curtis.w.franks@gmail.com> wrote:
Okay, mayb= e we should take on both projects (exploration and promotion of logical lan= guage in general and also, separately, the exploration and promotion of Loj= ban (regardless of its status as a logical language)). We might also want t= o create or establish a framework for the creation of a Lojban derivative w= hich is a logical language by all previously mentioned standards.

How do we do this? What proposals or = orientations are actionable?


I'= ;d suggest three motions determining the principal aims of the LLG.

Motion 1. A principal goal of t= he LLG (coequal with any other principal goals) is exploration and promotio= n of logical language in general.

Motion 2.=C2=A0A principal= goal of the LLG (coequal with any other principal goals) is promotion of L= ojban (regardless of its status as a logical language) as defined by docume= nts endorsed by the LLG.

Motion 3.=C2=A0A principal goal of the LLG (coequal with any other principal goals) is= creation of a Lojban derivative that is a logical language.=C2=A0

For extra clarity, add in to each motion the definition of logical languag= e that I gave earlier.=C2=A0

If M= otion 1 were to pass, then I'd have some modest concrete suggestions fo= r what LLG could do (and I would apply to rejoin LLG). If Motion 3 were to = pass then I'd probably have some constructive contributions to make to = the ensuing discussion.

--And.




On Dec 29, 2017 10:30, = "And Rosta" <and.rosta@gmail.com> wrote:
<= br>

O= n 26 Dec 2017 19:36, "Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
> The bylaws were formulated to broa= dly cover a variety of forms of research into logical languages, and there = has always been the possibility of conducting or supporting such research. = But to put it simply, no one has been interested in such research EXCEPT in= the form of promoting and studying the use of Lojban.

= That statement is patently false and wilfully amnesiac.

I was for many years the most vocal proponent of the LLG's mission to = explore logical language, as opposed to the mission to promote Lojban. As a= member of LLG and the Lojban community I eventually changed my position, b= ut this was because it became increasingly evident to me that the two goals= (of exploring and promoting logical language, versus promoting Lojban) are= in fact antithetical; within LLG and the Lojban community, a victory for t= he one goal can be achieved only through the defeat of the other; but succe= ss in the goal of promoting Lojban can be achieved only within LLG and the = Lojban community, whereas success in the goal of promoting logical language= can be achieved outside it; many promoters of Lojban (as opposed to logica= l language) have invested much of their life's work in the enterprise, = and pursuing the failure of another's life's work should be avoided= where possible; therefore LLG and the Lojban community should be left to p= romote (conservative) Lojban unopposed (and therefore must not be required = to promote logical language).
=
>=C2=A0 Indeed, there = is a strong antipathy to other "logical languages", which I admit= to sharing; I'm simply not interested, and never have been - languages= are too hard for me to learn, and IMHO too difficult to properly "inv= ent" with the complete full documentation needed for new people to lea= rn and use them.=C2=A0 So I hope selpa'i will forgive me if I don't= look at his own efforts at a new "logical language".

This is all true, except that the Lojban that Lojbab endorses is = not a logical language, for all that it might falsely advertise itself as s= uch.=C2=A0

The antipathy Lojbab describes exists becaus= e Lojban seeks to accrue users and promotes itself by falsely claiming to b= e a logical language. Any logical language is therefore a rival to Lojban. = And Lojban's false claim to be a logical language, coupled with its com= parative fame, is an obstacle to -- a distraction from -- the promotion of = logical language.




So LLG can adopt such research, if some LLG members want to do so, but unti= l then LLG considers supporting Lojban to be the best way to promote the pu= rposes described in the Bylaws.

Again, patent bullshit.=C2=A0


While I w= ould be only too delighted for the LLG to promote the purposes described in= the Bylaws, that would entail deprecating Lojban in its baselined and curr= ent forms. Given that LLG recruits from the Lojban community rather than fr= om the logical language community, it is obviously and not unreasonably the= case that the large majority of LLG members prioritize the promotion of Lo= jban over the promotion of the purposes described in the Bylaws.=C2=A0

--And.

_________________________________= ______________
Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@loj= ban.org
http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-= members


_______________________________________________
Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@lojban.org
http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-= members


--f403045fa99a5f967705618e18fe-- --===============9104167408025943475== 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 --===============9104167408025943475==--