From arj@nvg.ntnu.no Tue Oct 16 06:09:22 2007 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-members); Tue, 16 Oct 2007 06:09:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sabre-wulf.nvg.ntnu.no ([129.241.210.67]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1IhmAg-0001pc-Ks for llg-members@lojban.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 06:09:22 -0700 Received: from hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no (hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no [129.241.210.68]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sabre-wulf.nvg.ntnu.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3AF894787 for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:08:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no (8.13.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id l9GD8xnd022288 for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:08:59 +0200 Received: (from arj@localhost) by hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no (8.13.8/8.13.1/Submit) id l9GD8xDG022287 for llg-members@lojban.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:08:59 +0200 Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:08:59 +0200 From: Arnt Richard Johansen To: llg-members@lojban.org Subject: [llg-members] Re: LLG AGM 2007: The Most Common Word In The Language Message-ID: <20071016130859.GX1196@nvg.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-NVG-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-NVG-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: arj@nvg.ntnu.no Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis X-Spam-Score: 0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 415 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: arj@nvg.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-members@lojban.org X-list: llg-members On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 08:49:18AM -0400, Matt Arnold wrote: > You have heard the argument that the BPFK needs to consider every > change all at once, as a group, so that they can say "you can have > your way in this part of the language if I can have my way in that > part of the language". Where did you get the idea that the BPFK works like that? Bargaining is not the point of considering every change all at once. Making sure that everything works together as a whole is the point of considering every change all at once. By taking xorlo off the table altogether, we disrupt that part of the process. That is not a good idea. -- Arnt Richard Johansen http://arj.nvg.org/ P� hjul er du kj�rende.