Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org designates 173.13.139.236 as permitted sender) client-ip=173.13.139.236;
Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 13:25:19 -0700
From: Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Robin retry: commands.
Message-ID: <20130504202515.GG20411@stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
Mail-Followup-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
References: <20130504201243.GE20411@stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
 <51856E57.2010808@gmx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <51856E57.2010808@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

On Sat, May 04, 2013 at 10:23:51PM +0200, selpa'i wrote:
> la .camgusmis. cu cusku di'e
> >I think {le'o} and {ga'i} between them do what I want, depending
> >on situation.
> 
> This would seem to imply that all commands are either expressed
> aggressively or with hauteur, which I personally find doubtful.
> There is a certain force behind a command, but the nature of that
> force needn't correspond to one of those two, in my opinion.
> 
> Has {.e'i} fallen out of favor with you again?

Eeeeenh?  Having noticed {le'o}, I simply acknowledged that that was
what I really wanted, in terms of emotional content.  I'm on the
fence about {.e'i} (which never stopped being true).

-Robin

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.