Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of durka42@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400d:c01::236 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400d:c01::236;
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2014 17:45:57 -0400
From: Alex Burka <durka42@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Message-ID: <5507306A8D8D440BB9AB5F54C948F9B1@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <540B8D1B.8050807@gmail.com>
References: <25B055499F67420FA34794323F9A95AB@gmail.com>
 <540B374A.9040409@lojban.org>
 <CAO7bV+gQQtt4qtnrj6LUWpj5rv5Qpkoy3GaKsg+CewG3-Mw+OA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMDmBpHS_h8ui41oZnKO4kt13KdVCodTa+crWzo3E9hyyBummg@mail.gmail.com>
 <540B8D1B.8050807@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] the future of Lojban's leadership
MIME-Version: 1.0
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="540cd215_4bdd53fd_184"
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -

--540cd215_4bdd53fd_184
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

coi,

I haven=E2=80=99t lost faith in the endeavor, though I certainly can=E2=80=
=99t blame Dustin for doing so. I do think it will take rather longer than =
we perhaps thought when this thread began. =20

I still think that the software-development model is the way to go. Among o=
ther things, it lets wild experimentation coexist safely with the carefully=
 curated =E2=80=9Cmaster branch=E2=80=9D =E2=80=94 I mean, this is already =
happening in the community, but it=E2=80=99s a mess and a hodgepodge of pro=
jects, exactly because there=E2=80=99s no accepted process, and it doesn=E2=
=80=99t help that people who propose one tend to get shouted down.

Languages change when they are actively used. It=E2=80=99s a fact. For Lojb=
an, it=E2=80=99s a fact that threatens to conflict with some of its good fe=
atures =E2=80=94 monosemy, syntactic unambiguity, parseability, etc. One =
=E2=80=9Csolution=E2=80=9D to this conundrum is to freeze the vocabulary an=
d grammar, forever. I think this will just result in everyone leaving (whic=
h seems to put me in fundamental disagreement with those who think that if =
we change anything, then everyone will leave). But I also think there=E2=80=
=99s a middle ground. We can allow some changes (with strict review, li=E2=
=80=99a sai), without destroying the language.

To one of Lojbab=E2=80=99s points (which are well taken, by the way, especi=
ally the one about documentation of experimental grammar being hard to find=
): in my mind, there is no way Lojban can be "considered DONE as an enginee=
ring effort=E2=80=9D. Certainly the publication of the CLL and everything l=
eading up to that was an impressive achievement, and maybe it can be consid=
ered =E2=80=9Calmost done=E2=80=9D, but the mere existence of the BPFK and =
the ZG are confirmation that the final word (whatever that means when appli=
ed to a living language, see above) has not been said. Moreover, it=E2=80=
=99s hard to deny that changes have happened and become accepted by large p=
ortions of the community since the publication of the CLL: the BPFK morphol=
ogy. xorlo was adopted into the ZG. Nearly everyone uses dotside for names.=
 Modern {ka} with {ce=E2=80=99u}. The experimental gismu {kibro} and cmavo =
{di=E2=80=99ai}. vu=E2=80=99o po=E2=80=99onai.

To be honest, I am most interested in using Lojban to create things and con=
verse with people. Secondary to that, I have my opinions on different parts=
 of the experimental grammar and other banske issues (I=E2=80=99m not at al=
l a linguistics expert). I am least interested in getting bogged down in le=
galese and bylaws if such things turn out to obstruct the use of Lojban and=
 encourage it to stagnate (which is what=E2=80=99s arguably happened in the=
 last decade). That=E2=80=99s a good way to lose contributors.
That being said, yes, I=E2=80=99d like to join the LLG. I recognize its imp=
ortance. I don=E2=80=99t want to spend more time on politics than on other =
things, and I don=E2=80=99t know if it=E2=80=99s too mired under bylaws etc=
 to make meaningful progress. But if it can, it seems like the best hope fo=
r moving forward without splitting the community.

Anyway, that=E2=80=99s my two cents. I feel strongly that progress is neede=
d and that there=E2=80=99s a way to get there, but I don=E2=80=99t claim to=
 have all the answers of course. I am glad that there will be a meeting soo=
n, because that=E2=80=99s at least potential progress.

mu=E2=80=99o mi=E2=80=99e la durka =20


On Saturday, September 6, 2014 at 6:39 PM, And Rosta wrote:

> Dustin Lacewell, On 06/09/2014 20:00:
> > And,
> > =20
> > I lost faith in the endeavor. Here we are four months later still
> > talking about schism and the CLL and lojbab still grand-standing his
> > ultimate wisdom even though nothing has been done in the intern on
> > his or anyone else's part. Tragically, most everyone who supported
> > the original proposal here, to move the maintenance of the language
> > to a more software-development format have all crumbled under the
> > rhetoric of councils, bylaws, hearings and whatever needless muck
> > that serves only to strain people's already volunteer interest and
> > contribution.
> > =20
> =20
> =20
> Come the next members' meeting, I will certainly vote for these new kids =
to join LLG and, if it comes up at the meeting, for Selpa'i to be tasked wi=
th leading the bpfk, but I think that rather than focusing on legalistic an=
d political stuff it would just be better for interested folk to discuss an=
d document their vision of a completed Lojban. Xorlo came about by xorxes, =
through some discussion with others and much solitary cerebration, coming u=
p with a gadri system different from CLL's, and the community, realizing th=
at xorlo solved so many intractable problems with the CLL version, eventual=
ly embraced it. It prevailed not because xorxes bothered with legalistic or=
 political stuff but because open-minded Lojbanists overwhelmingly recogniz=
ed its superiority.
> =20
> I suppose each new generation builds on, and so seems brighter than, its =
precursors, but the latest generation of Lojbanists strikes me as brimming =
with lojbo talent that in previous generations is not to be found outside a=
 small area of ketco tumla. Therefore this new generation, the selpa'is, th=
e guskants, et al should IMO just get on with sorting out the linguistic st=
uff, trusting that in due course the political stuff will take care of itse=
lf.
> =20
> --And.
> =20
> -- =20
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Go=
ogle Groups "lojban" group.
> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/l=
ojban/_juGorRhWtI/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to lojba=
n+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com (mailto:lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com)=
.
> To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com (mailto:lojb=
an@googlegroups.com).
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> =20
> =20


--=20
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 e=
mail 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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--540cd215_4bdd53fd_184
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline


                <div>
                    coi,</div><div><br></div><div>I haven=E2=80=99t lost fa=
ith in the endeavor, though I certainly can=E2=80=99t blame Dustin for doin=
g so. I do think it will take rather longer than we perhaps thought when th=
is thread began.
                </div><div><br></div><div>I still think that the software-d=
evelopment model is the way to go. Among other things, it lets wild experim=
entation coexist safely with the carefully curated =E2=80=9Cmaster branch=
=E2=80=9D =E2=80=94 I mean, this is already happening in the community, but=
 it=E2=80=99s a mess and a hodgepodge of projects, exactly because there=E2=
=80=99s no accepted process, and it doesn=E2=80=99t help that people who pr=
opose one tend to get shouted down.</div><div><br></div><div>Languages chan=
ge when they are actively used. It=E2=80=99s a fact. For Lojban, it=E2=80=
=99s a fact that threatens to conflict with some of its good features =E2=
=80=94 monosemy, syntactic unambiguity, parseability, etc. One =E2=80=9Csol=
ution=E2=80=9D to this conundrum is to freeze the vocabulary and grammar, f=
orever. I think this will just result in everyone leaving (which seems to p=
ut me in fundamental disagreement with those who think that if we change an=
ything, then everyone will leave). But I also think there=E2=80=99s a middl=
e ground. We can allow some changes (with strict review, li=E2=80=99a sai),=
 without destroying the language.</div><div><br></div><div>To one of Lojbab=
=E2=80=99s points (which are well taken, by the way, especially the one abo=
ut documentation of experimental grammar being hard to find): in my mind, t=
here is no way Lojban can be "considered DONE as an engineering effort=E2=
=80=9D. Certainly the publication of the CLL and everything leading up to t=
hat was an impressive achievement, and maybe it can be considered =E2=80=9C=
almost done=E2=80=9D, but the mere existence of the BPFK and the ZG are con=
firmation that the final word (whatever that means when applied to a living=
 language, see above) has not been said. Moreover, it=E2=80=99s hard to den=
y that changes have happened and become accepted by large portions of the c=
ommunity since the publication of the CLL: the BPFK morphology. xorlo was a=
dopted into the ZG. Nearly everyone uses dotside for names. Modern {ka} wit=
h {ce=E2=80=99u}. The experimental gismu {kibro} and cmavo {di=E2=80=99ai}.=
 vu=E2=80=99o po=E2=80=99onai.</div><div><br></div><div>To be honest, I am =
most interested in using Lojban to create things and converse with people. =
Secondary to that, I have my opinions on different parts of the experimenta=
l grammar and other banske issues (I=E2=80=99m not at all a linguistics exp=
ert). I am least interested in getting bogged down in legalese and bylaws i=
f such things turn out to obstruct the use of Lojban and encourage it to st=
agnate (which is what=E2=80=99s arguably happened in the last decade). That=
=E2=80=99s a good way to lose contributors.</div><div>That being said, yes,=
 I=E2=80=99d like to join the LLG. I recognize its importance. I don=E2=80=
=99t want to spend more time on politics than on other things, and I don=E2=
=80=99t know if it=E2=80=99s too mired under bylaws etc to make meaningful =
progress. But if it can, it seems like the best hope for moving forward wit=
hout splitting the community.</div><div><br></div><div>Anyway, that=E2=80=
=99s my two cents. I feel strongly that progress is needed and that there=
=E2=80=99s a way to get there, but I don=E2=80=99t claim to have all the an=
swers of course. I am glad that there will be a meeting soon, because that=
=E2=80=99s at least potential progress.</div><div><br></div><div>mu=E2=80=
=99o mi=E2=80=99e la durka</div>
                <div></div>
                =20
                <p style=3D"color: #A0A0A8;">On Saturday, September 6, 2014=
 at 6:39 PM, And Rosta wrote:</p>
                <blockquote type=3D"cite" style=3D"border-left-style:solid;=
border-width:1px;margin-left:0px;padding-left:10px;">
                    <span><div><div><div>Dustin Lacewell, On 06/09/2014 20:=
00:</div><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div><div>And,</div><div><br></div><div>=
I lost faith in the endeavor. Here we are four months later still</div><div=
>talking about schism and the CLL and lojbab still grand-standing his</div>=
<div>ultimate wisdom even though nothing has been done in the intern on</di=
v><div>his or anyone else's part. Tragically, most everyone who supported</=
div><div>the original proposal here, to move the maintenance of the languag=
e</div><div>to a more software-development format have all crumbled under t=
he</div><div>rhetoric of councils, bylaws, hearings and whatever needless m=
uck</div><div>that serves only to strain people's already volunteer interes=
t and</div><div>contribution.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>C=
ome the next members' meeting, I will certainly vote for these new kids to =
join LLG and, if it comes up at the meeting, for Selpa'i to be tasked with =
leading the bpfk, but I think that rather than focusing on legalistic and p=
olitical stuff it would just be better for interested folk to discuss and d=
ocument their vision of a completed Lojban. Xorlo came about by xorxes, thr=
ough some discussion with others and much solitary cerebration, coming up w=
ith a gadri system different from CLL's, and the community, realizing that =
xorlo solved so many intractable problems with the CLL version, eventually =
embraced it. It prevailed not because xorxes bothered with legalistic or po=
litical stuff but because open-minded Lojbanists overwhelmingly recognized =
its superiority.</div><div><br></div><div>I suppose each new generation bui=
lds on, and so seems brighter than, its precursors, but the latest generati=
on of Lojbanists strikes me as brimming with lojbo talent that in previous =
generations is not to be found outside a small area of ketco tumla. Therefo=
re this new generation, the selpa'is, the guskants, et al should IMO just g=
et on with sorting out the linguistic stuff, trusting that in due course th=
e political stuff will take care of itself.</div><div><br></div><div>--And.=
</div><div><br></div><div>-- </div><div>You received this message because y=
ou are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "lojban" group.</div><div=
>To unsubscribe from this topic, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com=
/d/topic/lojban/_juGorRhWtI/unsubscribe">https://groups.google.com/d/topic/=
lojban/_juGorRhWtI/unsubscribe</a>.</div><div>To unsubscribe from this grou=
p and all its topics, send an email to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban+unsubscribe=
@googlegroups.com">lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.</div><div>To po=
st to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com">=
lojban@googlegroups.com</a>.</div><div>Visit this group at <a href=3D"http:=
//groups.google.com/group/lojban">http://groups.google.com/group/lojban</a>=
.</div><div>For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/=
optout">https://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.</div></div></div></span>
                =20
                =20
                =20
                =20
                </blockquote>
                =20
                <div>
                    <br>
                </div>
           =20

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;lojban&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">lojban+unsub=
scribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.=
com">lojban@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/lojban">http:=
//groups.google.com/group/lojban</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/optout">http=
s://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.<br />

--540cd215_4bdd53fd_184--