Received: from mail-la0-f60.google.com ([209.85.215.60]:34994)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.80.1)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncBDNZFNNFVAHRBHG2QWQQKGQEQ2OI7FA@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1XWPaO-0001jR-Rc
	for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 05:52:53 -0700
Received: by mail-la0-f60.google.com with SMTP id ge10sf673163lab.25
        for <lojban-list-archive@lojban.org>; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 05:52:45 -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
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=TnkGb78Ox8Alsy/cLfrZvMzcBLlTWVIonMb6nSUuFRk=;
        b=ZaKSwblF5GVdZsRJQF1NOogfzna2m3YWDqkAoilQnsSnOBNL+osoJqkZyIUrSNh3Of
         9ikMYpwvyYaS1PtlzxnTk+sWwX5FfoJFfIqUztlHEbfzl9m1oaeUfSsN47sludUrsdcN
         BfhLFlvUb5a4uxCCek7Bzb4rnr6fFfQh6PZrTRLJC29G+lezIJ1bALYkm/DFLmlV1dGS
         1JBxbZO4YZgo8bwJjD53j+aHq8WJrX/JmJyL7hPqnSAivKV3WSF+SwKLHlRYgXV2E9Ug
         znhDBkzgU8dvEwnm4Cf5krvSNQkyuTxKjhMSxg1fr9L4rGhpeuChy5lIWIY9z3xNBQXC
         lfeQ==
X-Received: by 10.152.29.225 with SMTP id n1mr8100lah.11.1411476765286;
        Tue, 23 Sep 2014 05:52:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.152.234.40 with SMTP id ub8ls44481lac.70.gmail; Tue, 23 Sep
 2014 05:52:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.112.76.229 with SMTP id n5mr2181837lbw.8.1411476763931;
        Tue, 23 Sep 2014 05:52:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x234.google.com (mail-wi0-x234.google.com [2a00:1450:400c:c05::234])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i6si121475wiy.0.2014.09.23.05.52.43
        for <lojban@googlegroups.com>
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Tue, 23 Sep 2014 05:52:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c05::234 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c05::234;
Received: by mail-wi0-f180.google.com with SMTP id q5so4982633wiv.7
        for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 05:52:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.194.174.39 with SMTP id bp7mr2659024wjc.131.1411476763830;
        Tue, 23 Sep 2014 05:52:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.208] ([95.147.224.104])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id i5sm15851881wjz.0.2014.09.23.05.52.42
        for <multiple recipients>
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Tue, 23 Sep 2014 05:52:43 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <54216D38.7030904@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 13:53:12 +0100
From: And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120711 Thunderbird/14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: criticism of lojban needed
References: <CAO7bV+gzuMQacgo6dwYAhyUd1NEVv-6Up2uC=j=XFGvx+bU+QA@mail.gmail.com> <5eccb6c5-6904-4b30-a49c-455e9bb1d32a@googlegroups.com> <5406CBB8.20305@gmail.com> <1409759095.40258.YahooMailNeo@web181102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <20140903160258.GH585@samsa.fritz.box> <mgWK1o01N56Cr6M01gWL9k> <5407A799.3040903@lojban.org>
In-Reply-To: <5407A799.3040903@lojban.org>
X-Original-Sender: and.rosta@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com;       spf=pass
 (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c05::234
 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=and.rosta@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: <lojban.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/post>, <mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/>, <mailto:lojban+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe>, <mailto:lojban+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:googlegroups-manage+1004133512417+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>,
 <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-)
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -

Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG, On 04/09/2014 00:43:
> On 9/3/2014 12:30 PM, selpa'i wrote:
>> If the goal is to make a language that unambiguously encodes logic, then
>> that's relatively easy to achieve. See xorban for one model that doesn't
>> add too much unnecessary baggage. Lojban does achieves it too to some
>> degree, but it has so much extras that most of the language is still
>> undefined. We cannot easily convert Lojban to logic due to that.
>
> I need to note here that if the goal is merely to encode logic, then
> Lojban can probably be called "successful" in that I believe that
> anything expressible in logical notation can probably be represented
> in Mex (the operators needed for any given notation have not been
> defined, but Mex is defined so as to allow innumerable sets of
> operators as well as precedences).
>
> So far as I know, no one in the community is interested in such a
> narrow goal.

For lots of people in the community that goal is the bare minimum and then =
success is measured by how ergonomically the logic is encoded. Lojban can e=
ncode logic, but does so extraordinarily badly. And as Selpa'i notes, most =
of Lojban doesn't unambiguusly encode logic.

>> And what about simplicity? Here Gua\spi and Xorban are the clear
>> winners, closely followed by Toaq Dzu, and far in the distance comes
>> Lojban. Just compare the sizes of their grammars to get a rough idea.
>
> Of course part of the problem is that very few such languages have
> been USED to the extent that Lojban has.

Part of what problem? The problem of Lojban being so unnecessarily complex?=
 Lojban is not more complex because it has been used. It is more complex be=
cause its creators and leaders never cared much about simplicity.

--And.

--=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.