Received: from mail-lb0-f186.google.com ([209.85.217.186]:40319) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1XTmAD-00050V-2Z for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 23:22:58 -0700 Received: by mail-lb0-f186.google.com with SMTP id c11sf434853lbj.3 for ; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 23:22:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=eNFkVnQG/34A28vPFL7VYW2UD3Xv1M0/aGtiU7tJw9s=; b=YChcyMGidJ2kiMTu8Cnug2cUXVOSYUbgu55G5Y6Pom7OtMmOx9asecbrPRp/6/r3rQ lo0fNCen5M/kDhRwHhx3Ophn+HqhGDA+JjMe7uCxJPmC8Wo6PCq9JYQH1mPiWAA7jwJf XQHeXd4stbR2DxTn6ShEGYdBTpNh/A9KnaLFRd8rai3bWHLIVyZnuUcRKpQcllGztirn diD/HBIZAN6MpJDhojxXOmXXn+qcvVpOn7bPugnkIdGFWnUFfBb13DpMGl0nl9m6wIsr zVz4iJ49klIHHm2cS6Bmsi183hTiE3rDg7dnls9BTG9rY0bSVl5UxZdo0gFhTC0S1UqY RMWg== X-Received: by 10.180.74.233 with SMTP id x9mr109721wiv.1.1410848569650; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 23:22:49 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.180.94.135 with SMTP id dc7ls552504wib.36.gmail; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 23:22:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.194.100.3 with SMTP id eu3mr15252wjb.6.1410848569172; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 23:22:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wg0-x22f.google.com (mail-wg0-x22f.google.com [2a00:1450:400c:c00::22f]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id p7si818876wiz.1.2014.09.15.23.22.49 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 15 Sep 2014 23:22:49 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c00::22f as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c00::22f; Received: by mail-wg0-f47.google.com with SMTP id y10so4968090wgg.18 for ; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 23:22:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.107.231 with SMTP id hf7mr5702696wib.79.1410848569044; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 23:22:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.89.193 with HTTP; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 23:22:48 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <507cbf11-c335-42e2-8a82-57e5f43e81b1@googlegroups.com> References: <541714B1.9080300@gmail.com> <507cbf11-c335-42e2-8a82-57e5f43e81b1@googlegroups.com> Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 10:22:48 +0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Logos Initiative From: Gleki Arxokuna To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c00::22f as permitted sender) smtp.mail=gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=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-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f3bad77ca339c050328c71e X-Spam-Note: SpamAssassin invocation failed --e89a8f3bad77ca339c050328c71e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 2014-09-16 4:39 GMT+04:00 TR NS : > > On Monday, September 15, 2014 5:45:18 PM UTC-4, aionys wrote: >> >> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:49 PM, TR NS wrote: >>> >>> Logla is a means to take on larger potential changes. Things like >>> simplified connectives (https://groups.google.com/ >>> forum/#!searchin/lojban/proposal/lojban/ExtEumbYoQg/A5IdZQ9Y5OEJ), a >>> simplified rafsi system, even re-consideration of the morphology. >>> >> >> Speaking specifically of the connectives, I myself look forward to the >> day when that proposal arrives on the voting block so I can cast my >> approval. Large changes to Lojban are not impossible. If it's a good idea, >> then I'm fairly certain the BPFK would vote it in- not unanimously, I'm >> sure, we don't all agree on everything. Not counting the freeze in place >> until the baseline is completed, the only thing that would prevent a >> change- great or small- to Lojban, is whether or not such a change was >> verifyably better than the thing before the change. And, in fact, even the >> freeze doesn't prevent change entirely, as xorlo happened even with the >> freeze, which seems to me to say that xorlo's changes are so obviously >> better than the previous state that waiting for the baseline was just not >> worth it. >> >> Admittedly, I don't think it very likely that a change proposal for the >> morphology would be very likely, but again, that really depends on the >> change itself. I mean, everyone knows the mekso portion of it is completely >> borked right now, so if someone managed to come up with a mekso that >> wasn't, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see it voted in. >> >> But even so, there are a lot of things I've seen proposed during my time >> here that I would expect would likely get passed were they ever formally >> put to the BPFK. Off the top of my head, changing the meaning of sa (it >> currently means "erase previous up to point of following word's class" as >> in {mi nelci lonu plise sa lo plise}, but in my admittedly limited >> experience people tend to use it as "replace that typo with this word" as >> in {mi klama fo lo karce sa fu}), making kibro, lo'ai, sa'ai, le'ai >> official, and probably a bunch of other stuff I can't think of off the top >> of my head. >> >> I can't say whether or not a fork would be needed for what you desire, >> since I don't know what you desire beyond cutting through the red tape, but >> I don't agree that a fork is needed to cut through the tape-- it's one >> ribbon. Granted, it's a big ribbon that's still being cut after decades of >> on again, off again work by a vast number of people done a bit at a time >> until each person maxed out their burnout:caring ratio (I did a few >> sections before I hit that, actually), but it's not a hard task, just one >> being done with "dull" scissors. (Because the work is tedious. Ha! A pun!) >> >> > I just don't see it happening. Even if you get this documentation work > complete, the next edition of CLL is going to have to be printed next year. > So only some minor adjustments are going to make it into that. And once > printed, it will set the baseline for the next decade at least. Anything > more than a minor proposal after it will be immediately hit with the > argument that people are relying on the stability of the new CLL. By the > time the next edition needs to be printed (in 2030?) some minor usage based > changes will have made inroads, I'm sure, like the `sa` proposal, but > little else and certainly nothing major. > CLL is not going to be the only document related to Lojban. If you think Lojban=CLL=Lojban then no. There are other materials on the way. I just can't see any need in forking anything. But if other do want then let it be so. I'm pretty happy with Lojban as a language. The lack of documents is annoying but people are working on that. > I think lojbob's remarks is the Leadership thread make that pretty clear > (e.g. https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/_juGorRhWtI/o-ELt2EaT9IJ). > The same arguments against changes as we approach the second printing will > be even more salient with the approach of the third. > > The bottom line is that ideas like a morphology that doesn't require > stress to parse, or the use of the final vowel to indicate sumti position, > or a simplified rafsi system that doesn't require memorization, and so on, > are simply never going to be given consideration. And I don't think it is > unreasonable to want a derivation of Loglan/Lojban where such ideas can be > explored. > > > -- > 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. > -- 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. --e89a8f3bad77ca339c050328c71e Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


2014-09-16 4:39 GMT+04:00 TR NS <transfire@gmail.com>:=

On Monday, Septembe= r 15, 2014 5:45:18 PM UTC-4, aionys wrote:
On= Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:49 PM, TR NS <tran...@gmail= .com> wrote:
Logla is a means to take on larger potential changes= . Things like simplified connectives (https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/lojban/pr= oposal/lojban/ExtEumbYoQg/A5IdZQ9Y5OEJ), a simplified rafsi syst= em, even re-consideration of the morphology.
=
Speaking specifically of the connectives, I my= self look forward to the day when that proposal arrives on the voting block= so I can cast my approval. Large changes to Lojban are not impossible. If = it's a good idea, then I'm fairly certain the BPFK would vote it in= - not unanimously, I'm sure, we don't all agree on everything. Not = counting the freeze in place until the baseline is completed, the only thin= g that would prevent a change- great or small- to Lojban, is whether or not= such a change was verifyably better than the thing before the change. And,= in fact, even the freeze doesn't prevent change entirely, as xorlo hap= pened even with the freeze, which seems to me to say that xorlo's chang= es are so obviously better than the previous state that waiting for the bas= eline was just not worth it.

Admittedly, I don't think it very l= ikely that a change proposal for the morphology would be very likely, but a= gain, that really depends on the change itself. I mean, everyone knows the = mekso portion of it is completely borked right now, so if someone managed t= o come up with a mekso that wasn't, I wouldn't be at all surprised = to see it voted in.

But even so, there are a lot of thing= s I've seen proposed during my time here that I would expect would like= ly get passed were they ever formally put to the BPFK. Off the top of my he= ad, changing the meaning of sa (it currently means "erase previous up = to point of following word's class" as in {mi nelci lonu plise sa = lo plise}, but in my admittedly limited experience people tend to use it as= "replace that typo with this word" as in {mi klama fo lo karce s= a fu}), making kibro, lo'ai, sa'ai, le'ai official, and probabl= y a bunch of other stuff I can't think of off the top of my head.
I can't say whether or not a fork would be needed for what= you desire, since I don't know what you desire beyond cutting through = the red tape, but I don't agree that a fork is needed to cut through th= e tape-- it's one ribbon. Granted, it's a big ribbon that's sti= ll being cut after decades of on again, off again work by a vast number of = people done a bit at a time until each person maxed out their burnout:carin= g ratio (I did a few sections before I hit that, actually), but it's no= t a hard task, just one being done with "dull" scissors. (Because= the work is tedious. Ha! A pun!)


I just don't see it happening. Even if you= get this documentation work complete, the next edition of CLL is going to = have to be printed next year. So only some minor adjustments are going to m= ake it into that. And once printed, it will set the baseline for the next d= ecade at least. Anything more than a minor proposal after it will be immedi= ately hit with the argument that people are relying on the stability of the= new CLL. By the time the next edition needs to be printed (in 2030?) some = minor usage based changes will have made inroads, I'm sure, like the `s= a` proposal, but little else and certainly nothing major.

CLL is not going to be the only document related= to Lojban.
If you think Lojban=3DCLL=3DLojban then no.
There are other materials on the way.

I just can&= #39;t see any need in forking anything. But if other do want then let it be= so.
I'm pretty happy with Lojban as a language.
Th= e lack of documents is annoying but people are working on that.
<= br>
=C2=A0
<= div> I think lojbob's remarks is the Leadership thread make that pretty= clear (e.g. https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/_juG= orRhWtI/o-ELt2EaT9IJ). The same arguments against changes as we approac= h the second printing will be even more salient with the approach of the th= ird.

The bottom line is that ideas like a morpholo= gy that doesn't require stress to parse, or the use of the final vowel = to indicate sumti position, or a simplified rafsi system that doesn't r= equire memorization, and so on, are simply never going to be given consider= ation. And I don't think it is unreasonable to want a derivation of Log= lan/Lojban where such ideas can be explored.


<= /div>

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;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.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsub= scribe@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 http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--e89a8f3bad77ca339c050328c71e--