From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Wed Aug 18 11:35:32 2004
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:35:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1BxVHY-0003ZN-3L
	for lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:35:32 -0700
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:35:32 -0700
To: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: Anyone there?
Message-ID: <20040818183532.GE13226@chain.digitalkingdom.org>
References: <1090965878.19576.201198081@webmail.messagingengine.com> <000001c484a5$26fe0b30$f004883e@crh37> <20040817221623.GO3538@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <537d06d004081721346545c866@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <537d06d004081721346545c866@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040722i
From: Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org>
X-archive-position: 689
X-Approved-By: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org
Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org
X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org
X-list: lojban-beginners

On Wed, Aug 18, 2004 at 06:34:05AM +0200, Philip Newton wrote:
> I've always used {mu'o} in my emails, if I use a Lojbanic salutation
> at all. Would you say that {fe'o} is preferable?

No, I agree with your arguments.  It was just interesting to see it
used.

-Robin

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/
Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!"