Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.217.181 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.217.181;
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 08:53:37 -0600
Message-ID: <CAMKwHj3oUNNzdNPXOjdwZPdRL_RWjhzoMfWXHCEyPnztxhtBDA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Are Natlang the best case for entropy in
 communication ?
From: Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0401faed3d250104c2fcae14
X-Spam_score: -0.7
X-Spam_score_int: -6
X-Spam_bar: /

--f46d0401faed3d250104c2fcae14
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

> It's up to you to consider I overlook that, but I tend to think you
> are too much emotionally involved in your reaction.   Ought to be more
> scientifically-minded...

I have to laugh at this. For one thing, Lindar isn't reacting to your
argument. As he said, he and every one else KNOWS what your argument is.
His response was "What's your point?", which means he wants to know WHY
you're "harping" on this. His anger, if any, is at the fact that he has
asked you repeatedly, and you have yet to answer him, but instead continue
to repeat yourself.

Furthermore, YOU are not being scientific.

The scientific method is:
1)  Formulate a question. In this case, I believe the question is "What are
the cause(s), if any, that make Lojban more prone to listener error in
noisy environments?"

2) Make a hypothesis. "The high similarity of the various cmavo series,
such as for example [so'a, so'e, so'i, so'o, so'u], make Lojban more error
prone."

3) Create predictions from the hypothesis. "A person hearing {lonu lo citri
cu na morji piso'aroi cu gasnu lonu lo citri cu rapli} in a noisy
environment will think he heard any of [so'a, so'e, so'i, so'o, so'u], but
will be unable to be sure which of them it was."

4) Perform tests.

5) Analyze the test results, adjusting the hypothesis accordingly and
returning to step 3).

You stopped at 2) and said "BIG PROBLEM! EVERYONE LISTEN TO ME NOW!" Not
only do you simply assume you're correct without even attempting to verify
your claim, but you offer nothing to fix this "problem" as well.

I don't believe it's a problem. Even assuming it is a problem, I don't
believe it's nearly as important or large a problem as you seem to think,
which is why I previously accused you of making mountains of molehills.
Finally, even assuming that you are completely correct and this is a huge
extremely important issue,  you offer no solution to the problem, nor do
you even state why you've brought it up /in the first place/.

Now, we all know that no changes that are not *absolutely* necessary will
even be considered at this time, or in the foreseeable future, so obviously
nothing's going to be done about this issue, assuming it exists. I've
already expressed my opinion to the contrary.

However, even were we considering proposals for changes, this one would not
*ever* pass. The reasons for this are: any change would break current and
past Lojban text (not backwards compatible), it has not been shown that
this issue actually exists, and it is a matter for debate whether the
unproven issues are more important than the well-known, established
benefits (i.e., ease of learning).

In any case, as far as I'm concerned, this subject is closed, at least
until supporting evidence, of which there is currently /none/, is provided.
The rest of you feel free to waste your time on this subject if you desire.

to pu benji ti fo lo mi me la.android. samcku toi

mu'o mi'e.aionys.

-- 
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.


--f46d0401faed3d250104c2fcae14
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p>&gt; It&#39;s up to you to consider I overlook that, but I tend to think=
 you<br>
&gt; are too much emotionally involved in your reaction. =A0 Ought to be mo=
re<br>
&gt; scientifically-minded...</p>
<p>I have to laugh at this. For one thing, Lindar isn&#39;t reacting to you=
r argument. As he said, he and every one else KNOWS what your argument is. =
His response was &quot;What&#39;s your point?&quot;, which means he wants t=
o know WHY you&#39;re &quot;harping&quot; on this. His anger, if any, is at=
 the fact that he has asked you repeatedly, and you have yet to answer him,=
 but instead continue to repeat yourself.</p>

<p>Furthermore, YOU are not being scientific.</p>
<p>The scientific method is:<br>
1)=A0 Formulate a question. In this case, I believe the question is &quot;W=
hat are the cause(s), if any, that make Lojban more prone to listener error=
 in noisy environments?&quot;</p>
<p>2) Make a hypothesis. &quot;The high similarity of the various cmavo ser=
ies, such as for example [so&#39;a, so&#39;e, so&#39;i, so&#39;o, so&#39;u]=
, make Lojban more error prone.&quot;</p>
<p>3) Create predictions from the hypothesis. &quot;A person hearing {lonu =
lo citri cu na morji piso&#39;aroi cu gasnu lonu lo citri cu rapli} in a no=
isy environment will think he heard any of [so&#39;a, so&#39;e, so&#39;i, s=
o&#39;o, so&#39;u], but will be unable to be sure which of them it was.&quo=
t;</p>

<p>4) Perform tests.</p>
<p>5) Analyze the test results, adjusting the hypothesis accordingly and re=
turning to step 3).</p>
<p>You stopped at 2) and said &quot;BIG PROBLEM! EVERYONE LISTEN TO ME NOW!=
&quot; Not only do you simply assume you&#39;re correct without even attemp=
ting to verify your claim, but you offer nothing to fix this &quot;problem&=
quot; as well.</p>

<p>I don&#39;t believe it&#39;s a problem. Even assuming it is a problem, I=
 don&#39;t believe it&#39;s nearly as important or large a problem as you s=
eem to think, which is why I previously accused you of making mountains of =
molehills. Finally, even assuming that you are completely correct and this =
is a huge extremely important issue,=A0 you offer no solution to the proble=
m, nor do you even state why you&#39;ve brought it up /in the first place/.=
</p>

<p>Now, we all know that no changes that are not *absolutely* necessary wil=
l even be considered at this time, or in the foreseeable future, so obvious=
ly nothing&#39;s going to be done about this issue, assuming it exists. I&#=
39;ve already expressed my opinion to the contrary.</p>

<p>However, even were we considering proposals for changes, this one would =
not *ever* pass. The reasons for this are: any change would break current a=
nd past Lojban text (not backwards compatible), it has not been shown that =
this issue actually exists, and it is a matter for debate whether the unpro=
ven issues are more important than the well-known, established benefits (i.=
e., ease of learning).</p>

<p>In any case, as far as I&#39;m concerned, this subject is closed, at lea=
st until supporting evidence, of which there is currently /none/, is provid=
ed. The rest of you feel free to waste your time on this subject if you des=
ire.</p>

<p>to pu benji ti fo lo mi me la.android. samcku toi</p>
<p>mu&#39;o mi&#39;e.aionys.</p>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
lojban" group.<br />
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou=
ps.com.<br />

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban=
?hl=3Den.<br />


--f46d0401faed3d250104c2fcae14--