From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Tue Jan 13 09:52:41 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Tue, 13 Jan 2009 09:52:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LMnRR-0005J2-8s for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2009 09:52:41 -0800 Received: from mail.geekisp.com ([216.168.135.169] helo=starfish.geekisp.com) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LMnRO-0005Ic-7i for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2009 09:52:40 -0800 Received: (qmail 11846 invoked by uid 1003); 13 Jan 2009 17:52:31 -0000 Received: from geekisp.com (localhost.geekisp.com [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.geekisp.com (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Tue, 13 Jan 2009 12:52:28 -0500 Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:52:03 -0700 To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: xelfanva Message-ID: <20090113175226.GP23891@sunflowerriver.org> References: <20090113001704.GA13721@sdf.lonestar.org> <925d17560901130933v29142ccfqa47f4f93d7559e30@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <925d17560901130933v29142ccfqa47f4f93d7559e30@mail.gmail.com> X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.11 (Ladyburn) From: Alan Post Mail-Followup-To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-Primary-Address: terminal@c0redump.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 1178 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: terminal-keyword-lojban.416ddb@c0redump.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 02:33:32PM -0300, Jorge Llamb?as wrote: > On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 2:11 AM, Brett Williams wrote: > > > > you might or might not want to use the popular new term for nameless: > > "caucme".. > > Is it really popular, or is it only a word used by the jbotcan > software? (BTW, is jbotcan down or is it just me that can't access > it?) It seems that "cmecau" makes more sense for "nameless" (= claxu > be lo cmene). "caucme" seems to be some kind of name (i.e. a word), > not someone or something without a name. > > mu'o mi'e xorxes > jbotcan is down for me too. -Alan