Received: from mail-oi0-f60.google.com ([209.85.218.60]:50474) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1XUQWb-0006aW-5z for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 18:28:46 -0700 Received: by mail-oi0-f60.google.com with SMTP id h136sf35990oig.25 for ; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 18:28:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-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=FWo5WTMpmkOzPYZuy203o3N5ngXPxkhP6oSPCrgLDtE=; b=vu5PVSaeQhVf88vGYG4INiS9Vj+3rfbmArOwqGs9rjMe1cifepzUXIbTStTq3GjBB+ dBaAr6BSm4boJGNd7oXX30edCE9cPv6djcaElLH+xWjsUduqNgdcimATMAFGsj5dbXli xM1vMPaxFxnbII652LtUX9eK/JOGigfzS52q+ohFvhGI4w0ID0srGv7i4a1OsHD7N30E 6rSD3nX48QG/5Pkdh+qpcL+2nuTAuLBfUbh2L755dlAALRvqO+7/EVjtWQUZ4PzHedSL FoNMjt0qHHgsnfRIK2bNTfcjWfvVIGDZcrbArFI4rkqoCVRI3eA7DfygqqDrKmTMTegH +0Lg== X-Received: by 10.50.30.38 with SMTP id p6mr209723igh.8.1411003718608; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 18:28:38 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.50.20.199 with SMTP id p7ls1217382ige.1.gmail; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 18:28:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.66.66.1 with SMTP id b1mr1129733pat.38.1411003718087; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 18:28:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eastrmfepo203.cox.net (eastrmfepo203.cox.net. [68.230.241.218]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id k7si1219297qcm.2.2014.09.17.18.28.37 for ; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 18:28:37 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: none (google.com: lojbab@lojban.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) client-ip=68.230.241.218; Received: from eastrmimpo305 ([68.230.241.237]) by eastrmfepo203.cox.net (InterMail vM.8.01.05.15 201-2260-151-145-20131218) with ESMTP id <20140918012837.UODG2658.eastrmfepo203.cox.net@eastrmimpo305> for ; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 21:28:37 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.102] ([72.209.248.61]) by eastrmimpo305 with cox id sRUd1o0071LDWBL01RUdhb; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 21:28:37 -0400 X-CT-Class: Clean X-CT-Score: 0.00 X-CT-RefID: str=0001.0A020209.541A3545.006A,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0 X-CT-Spam: 0 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=c+p1t2Bl c=1 sm=1 a=z9jnGXjs1dxvEuWvIXKNSw==:17 a=BGi6d-X4uLYA:10 a=kgXuTiDJhqYA:10 a=uCEDokIqHEMA:10 a=xmHE3fpoGJwA:10 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=8YJikuA2AAAA:8 a=EbaiizovFWvlzj14zIQA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=toD7b3LSjJcWT9_f:21 a=qtACxx9i8cak-AVG:21 a=z9jnGXjs1dxvEuWvIXKNSw==:117 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Message-ID: <541A3543.5080109@lojban.org> Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 21:28:35 -0400 From: Robert LeChevalier 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] Growth and decline in lojbanistan References: <5ebfd7de-df4d-4bac-90e9-08d182557c8c@googlegroups.com> <863e6344-9008-44be-8546-eed800c0a630@googlegroups.com> <1410966712.92433.YahooMailNeo@web181105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: lojbab@lojban.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) smtp.mail=lojbab@lojban.org 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: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_bar: - On 9/17/2014 6:53 PM, mukti wrote: > On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 12:11:54 PM UTC-3, clifford wrote: > > There was then a dearth of interesting problems for a while. I am > not sure that that one controversy and its two main participants > should be used to make any general claims about Lojban's popularity, > etc. > > > To be clear, I'm not trying to measure /popularity/ so much as /activity > /-- not how many people have been exposed to lojban or what their > sentiments are towards it, but rather, the extent to which people are > actively discussing and using lojban. For these purposes, an extended > debate about some aspect of lojban is a positive indicator. A lack of > "interesting problems" -- problems and/or interest -- registers as a > negative indication. (Disgusted silence would also count as a negative > -- it seems to me that it ought to!) The problem is that "interesting problems" of the sort mentioned indicate a lot of activity by a very few people, but the activity itself drives other people away, especially when it a) look esoteric and B) seems to imply incompleteness of design. I've always considered the more important number to be the number of "uniques"- different people who post (not subscribers but actual posters), as showing growth of the community and confidence on the part of new people that they can indeed contribute. But I'm not sure how easy that is to measure on other-than mailing lists. 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.