Received-SPF: none (google.com: lojbab@lojban.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) client-ip=68.230.241.213;
Message-ID: <5414B7AB.2010403@lojban.org>
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2014 17:31:23 -0400
From: "Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG" <lojbab@lojban.org>
Organization: The Logical Language Group, Inc.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] the future of Lojban's leadership
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>	<540F391F.5050002@lojban.org>	<336d2f55-fba7-46d5-8a8a-332e0dd24f39@googlegroups.com>	<CAMDmBpEwhMWSBPYx088g218xhSaAQq+k8utESSiiZLgVMdm_UQ@mail.gmail.com>	<584b4939-5c76-417c-9a52-bfe78de00ecb@googlegroups.com>	<541203DF.2070009@lojban.org> <pxFi1o00e56Cr6M01xFjJ7>
In-Reply-To: <pxFi1o00e56Cr6M01xFjJ7>
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=UTF-8; format=flowed
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -

On 9/11/2014 5:15 PM, Dustin Lacewell wrote:
> The biggest logical fallacy in this entire discourse is that the changes
> wanting to be made are dreamt up on a sterile whiteboard by 'language
> tinkerers' whatever the hell that actually means. The actual reality is
> that you have a substantial community (whether you want to hand wave us
> away as not being representitve somehow, a group of more than a handful
> of Lojban anything is substantial as far as I'm concerned)

It is true that "substantial" doesn't mean "representative".  Those who 
aren't in your group have no exposure to your usages, and hence the 
changes that you wish to impose on the rest of us generally seems 
arbitrary, and in any case requires extra learning (and possibly 
unlearning, which is the real bugaboo)

> who is using
> the language daily, continuously throughout the day and have been doing
> so for years.

Anyone who considers the variety of dialects even within smallish 
Britain, much less the larger USA can understand that different 
communities have different usages.

We cannot prevent such dialectization, and I wouldn't want to try.  But 
we also shouldn't allow one particular group/dialect dictate changes to 
everyone else, especially since the rest of us didn't experience 
whatever motivated your change.

The original intent was that after the baseline was documented, and then 
after some period of usage, a group - probably the rump byfy in the 
current situation, but hopefully more formalized - would accept 
proposals for changes in the language description based on actual usage. 
People in a formal software community would probably expect actual 
proposed change pages to the documentation as part of such proposals, as 
well as examples from actual usage.

> Those changes are the result of usage.

Your usage.  Not that of others.

> Of finding what works and doesn't work for us as -users of the language-. What's happening here is that we
> would like to commit our findings back into the language so we can both
> claim to be speaking "Lojban" and so that we don't have to qualify
> everything as being 'official' or 'experimental' to the many and regular
> new comers that show up on our door.

It's experimental until such time as it is official.  If it isn't yet 
documented, and it is new, then it is experimental (or jargon or cant). 
  I'm not even sure how it could possibly change, unless one decides to 
ignore the whole issue of documentation, in which case the language is 
whatever any given speaker actually uses.

> Diminish and minimize us all you want.

I don't "want".  I just have the responsibility to consider those 1000+ 
others who bought CLL and have no idea who you are or what you are 
using.  And I have to consider that any given change (as opposed to 
addition) potentially invalidates all the ever-growing corpus of text 
that is recorded before.

> But understand it doesn't
> actually move your interlocutors to do so.

Do you really think I am trying, much less expecting, to actually move you?

> We are aware of our own reality.

That's nice. But your reality isn't everyone's.

> If you're just singing to your own choir fine, but its
> important for the wider audience here to realize you're being
> offensively ignorant on this point.

Just consider that someone who has been working on this project for 
30-odd years just might know something that you haven't yet experienced. 
  You are the one who offends me (and more importantly the rest of the 
community), by saying that my/our experience isn't valid while yours is.

And your argument isn't especially new.  It was made a dozen years ago, 
by a group of whom Robin Powell is by far the best known.  He was given 
the BPFK chair and became a Board member and officer, and I stepped down 
as President.  I've been satisfied with his decisions since then.

> No doubt - day to day - we sure spend a whole lot more time using and
> talking about Lojban than you characterize yourself to be doing.

That's very nice.  But you still aren't the entirety of the language 
community, and you don't have the right to dictate to the rest of us 
(any more than I have the right to dictate to you).

> Please
> readjust your tone to acknowledge that the changes that are knocking at
> your door are legitimate concerns borne from -daily utilization.

I have no idea how legitimate your concerns are, and I am not the one 
who is going to decide (I may have a voice and a vote, but no more than 
anyone else has).

But, regarding tone, if you don't want to learn how to work with the 
rest of us, don't expect a lot of respect.  Expecting tact from me is 
probably a bit unreasonable.  I'm not a politician, and I've never been 
very tactful; but people know what I think, and they can be sure it 
represents my honest beliefs.  I've put a lot into this language and 
this community; probably only John Clifford and maybe Robin can claim 
comparable time, effort, and sacrifice.  And I find YOUR tone utterly 
dismissive of MY experience and commitment.

lojbab


-- 
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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.