Received: from mail-yw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.213.61]:35962) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1SSDHb-0006dI-NI; Wed, 09 May 2012 13:14:49 -0700 Received: by yhq56 with SMTP id 56sf932556yhq.16 for ; Wed, 09 May 2012 13:14:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=SD65EMV5+7BuyLX5v1kxia89Gd+VLDDJXEd0ptaBNLU=; b=w801M9LuiOleaIdJLtp7iGOcJVPKJzr21oh4gfoTYK6ezq2GhmTShggsiAjjUW6Dqk P/3BpHLf5wIZJYC/l4BTi5HPvtfWL3iBgNQwIBG3KO1PNUrW7o7gyVQj5vkkd4YxRAye +6N9qTFpD9iGruSWz7FeMTWfWOpR5Aedrsa68= Received: by 10.236.114.136 with SMTP id c8mr181732yhh.17.1336594480961; Wed, 09 May 2012 13:14:40 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.236.103.202 with SMTP id f50ls9831628yhg.4.gmail; Wed, 09 May 2012 13:14:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.236.72.163 with SMTP id t23mr178579yhd.18.1336594480151; Wed, 09 May 2012 13:14:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 13:14:38 -0700 (PDT) From: ianek To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Message-ID: <33420536.837.1336594478924.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynlx17> In-Reply-To: References: <201205080025.44688.phma@phma.optus.nu> <12872840.1048.1336566301897.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynjb15> <3f2be27f-7c0e-459f-9b8a-f0a3b401cfb1@l15g2000vbv.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: [lojban-beginners] Re: Reuse request MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: janek37@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: ls.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of janek37@gmail.com designates internal as permitted sender) smtp.mail=janek37@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com; contact lojban-beginners+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 300742228892 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_836_16728294.1336594478923" X-Spam-Score: 2.8 (++) X-Spam_score: 2.8 X-Spam_score_int: 28 X-Spam_bar: ++ X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.digitalkingdom.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On Wednesday, May 9, 2012 8:57:51 PM UTC+2, lincro wrote: > > > > On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Jonathan Jones wrote: > >> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Michael Turniansky > > wrote: >> >>> . >>> >> >> If you don't believe that you can own a pet, that's okay, that just >>> means "la clalis ponse lo mlatu na'e bo la aionys" :-) >>> (in any case, you're okay here, because "se dalpe'o" works, too. >>> >>> --gejyspa >>> >> >> I think the relationship between a pet and it's caretaker is a unique >> bond that has similarities to the relationship between a person and his >> friends, and boss and her subordinates, and a person and his property, but >> is not truly the same as any of these. But that's not really important, as >> it's a philosophical opinion and we're discussing grammar. >> >> > I agree. You're the one that said you didn't want to use "ponse" > because of your philosophy. I merely point out that the te ponse enables > you to limit the universe of who recognizes this ownership. In the eyes of > the majority of cultures and governments, you can ponse lo dalpe'o. In > some cultures, you can ponse lo gunka. In some, you can ponse lo fetspe, > and in some, you can ponse lo panzi. But like I said, you can use "se > dalpe'o", be uncontroversial and true to your philosophy. > [...] Content analysis details: (2.8 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (janek37[at]gmail.com) -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [209.85.213.61 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED No valid author signature, adsp_override is CUSTOM_MED -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 FUZZY_CPILL BODY: Attempt to obfuscate words in spam 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature 1.3 DRUGS_ERECTILE_OBFU Obfuscated reference to an erectile drug 2.2 DRUGS_ERECTILE Refers to an erectile drug ------=_Part_836_16728294.1336594478923 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Wednesday, May 9, 2012 8:57:51 PM UTC+2, lincro wrote: > > > > On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Jonathan Jones wrote: > >> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Michael Turniansky > > wrote: >> >>> . >>> >> >> If you don't believe that you can own a pet, that's okay, that just >>> means "la clalis ponse lo mlatu na'e bo la aionys" :-) >>> (in any case, you're okay here, because "se dalpe'o" works, too. >>> >>> --gejyspa >>> >> >> I think the relationship between a pet and it's caretaker is a unique >> bond that has similarities to the relationship between a person and his >> friends, and boss and her subordinates, and a person and his property, but >> is not truly the same as any of these. But that's not really important, as >> it's a philosophical opinion and we're discussing grammar. >> >> > I agree. You're the one that said you didn't want to use "ponse" > because of your philosophy. I merely point out that the te ponse enables > you to limit the universe of who recognizes this ownership. In the eyes of > the majority of cultures and governments, you can ponse lo dalpe'o. In > some cultures, you can ponse lo gunka. In some, you can ponse lo fetspe, > and in some, you can ponse lo panzi. But like I said, you can use "se > dalpe'o", be uncontroversial and true to your philosophy. > Of those things, the least controversial should be {mi ponse lo xance}, because I certainly am the owner of my hand, even if I can't point to an appropriate law/custom. Although, {mi ponse lo xance} sounds pretty gruesome to me. mu'o mi'e ianek -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban-beginners/-/pQ7w3s4Lg5oJ. To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en. ------=_Part_836_16728294.1336594478923 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wednesday, May 9, 2012 8:57:51 PM UTC+2, lincro wrote:


On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail= .com> wrote:
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Michael Tur= niansky <mturniansky@gmail.com> wrote:
.

   If you don't believe that you= can own a pet, that's okay, that just means "la clalis ponse lo mlatu na'e= bo la aionys"  :-)
   (in any case, you're okay here, because "se dalpe'o" work= s, too.

         --gejysp= a

I think the relationship between a pet and it's caretaker is a unique=20 bond that has similarities to the relationship between a person and his=20 friends, and boss and her subordinates, and a person and his property,=20 but is not truly the same as any of these. But that's not really=20 important, as it's a philosophical opinion and we're discussing grammar.


&n= bsp; I agree.  You're the one that said you didn't want to use "ponse"= because of your philosophy.  I merely point out that the te ponse ena= bles you to limit the universe of who recognizes this ownership.  In t= he eyes of the  majority of cultures and governments, you can ponse lo= dalpe'o.  In some cultures, you can ponse lo gunka.  In some, yo= u can ponse lo fetspe, and in some, you can ponse lo panzi.  But like = I said, you can use "se dalpe'o", be uncontroversial and true to your philo= sophy.  

Of those th= ings, the least controversial should be {mi ponse lo xance}, because I cert= ainly am the owner of my hand, even if I can't point to an appropriate law/= custom. Although, {mi ponse lo xance} sounds pretty gruesome to me.

mu'o mi'e ianek

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= Lojban Beginners" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/l= ojban-beginners/-/pQ7w3s4Lg5oJ.
=20 To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@= googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= -beginners?hl=3Den.
------=_Part_836_16728294.1336594478923--