Received: from mail-yw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.213.61]:60819) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1SgIb9-0003r2-OP; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 09:45:18 -0700 Received: by yhq56 with SMTP id 56sf4713268yhq.16 for ; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 09:45:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-spam-score:x-spam_score :x-spam_score_int:x-spam_bar:sender:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=2I/UtpoCDD4C3vYf9LvhAVRp2yjDaemjRL7w2ZAg+Nc=; b=wWmRzb7W0gYyWKyFbffkBIx/BKpS3zcjki9YDabQXarAL+oym10COvSYOGvZR11axI 0SlD/HI0MIuvQGzE/IivgrG8xz41m74PEHriqfXB2dzWsSfONXraXnNoip0etsxPBYBs fZxc6ou60JHDyBT3fmE1XvZFCLR1UBOAUjZ3c= Received: by 10.68.230.34 with SMTP id sv2mr798562pbc.6.1339951505337; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 09:45:05 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.68.233.198 with SMTP id ty6ls10705560pbc.2.gmail; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 09:45:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.196.232 with SMTP id ip8mr12890515pbc.6.1339951504814; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 09:45:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.196.232 with SMTP id ip8mr12890514pbc.6.1339951504802; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 09:45:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from stodi.digitalkingdom.org (mail.digitalkingdom.org. [173.13.139.236]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id iq5si245181pbc.1.2012.06.17.09.45.04 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 17 Jun 2012 09:45:04 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of nobody@stodi.digitalkingdom.org designates 173.13.139.236 as permitted sender) client-ip=173.13.139.236; Received: from nobody by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1SgIb1-0003qz-Hn for lojban@googlegroups.com; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 09:45:03 -0700 Received: from mail-lb0-f181.google.com ([209.85.217.181]:36700) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1SgIaz-0003qm-Mb for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 09:45:02 -0700 Received: by lbbgk8 with SMTP id gk8so4036834lbb.40 for ; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 09:44:54 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.148.161 with SMTP id tt1mr11477928lab.4.1339951494316; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 09:44:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.152.46.36 with HTTP; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 09:44:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2012 10:44:54 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: [lojban] Re: Lojban Wiktionary closure proposal. From: Jonathan Jones To: lojban-list@lojban.org X-Spam-Score: -0.8 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.8 X-Spam_score_int: -7 X-Spam_bar: / Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: eyeonus@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of nobody@stodi.digitalkingdom.org designates 173.13.139.236 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=nobody@stodi.digitalkingdom.org; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f22bb3dd5c23a04c2adc450 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / --e89a8f22bb3dd5c23a04c2adc450 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 So, to get back on topic here: Do we care at all about the existence of a Lojban Wiktionary, or the lack thereof? If we do, then we should do something about the proposed deletion. If we don't, then no further action or discussion on our part is needed. On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 7:32 AM, Jonathan Jones wrote: > Google alerts recently informed me of this: > > > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects/Closure_of_Lojban_Wiktionary > > Do we care? > > -- > mu'o mi'e .aionys. > > .i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o > (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D ) > > -- mu'o mi'e .aionys. .i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D ) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. --e89a8f22bb3dd5c23a04c2adc450 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable So, to get back on topic here: Do we care at all about the existence of a L= ojban Wiktionary, or the lack thereof?

If we do, then we should do s= omething about the proposed deletion. If we don't, then no further acti= on or discussion on our part is needed.

On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 7:32 AM, Jonathan Jo= nes <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
Google alerts recently informed me of this:

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_= projects/Closure_of_Lojban_Wiktionary

Do we care?

--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo= pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Sid= e! Luke, I am your father. :D )




--
mu'o = mi'e .aionys.

.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi= .luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father= . :D )

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.
--e89a8f22bb3dd5c23a04c2adc450--