Received: from mail-ob0-f185.google.com ([209.85.214.185]:33902) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.85) (envelope-from ) id 1aAcR4-0002kd-Bb for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 03:46:05 -0800 Received: by mail-ob0-f185.google.com with SMTP id q2sf320960obl.1 for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 03:45:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version :content-type:x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=dORKZpmpcqNXwCv5X2o9Y8IhFPD1SEY+AC7IQmGC3oE=; b=daTMqi7a/BMgcVQCbwIDzor9lZg2rVgvMiQ3lTzLRAN/grgRmjQdzhEnHcBhtjJSEo 1DTHD6UlDcPeRZ8wL3A2/IO62N1tItSI7DQKNKr/iC23rbsFkkFs6inznHTDSVlO2aTX 0N/WiBgfUCParmfvfhGed0KNf/FQrTe4jzEgHUTZ14S7iY3seRLIl4j54ScO0PBvoqMY Vr0FlValJAucvnOLZCN5+eWi7w7+nvoU5AHE9NY/MAVpRZpOa2WWUVu88P0X3jNcwvuL dIF8xy5Gejyycj/+p5KH52ObhjoOTR40NLNwb7Ykeo7WL+7eYA5od2OzKaoFHANU8Uu+ v07A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version :content-type:x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=dORKZpmpcqNXwCv5X2o9Y8IhFPD1SEY+AC7IQmGC3oE=; b=jmKVhlEArQpoEPjnJ5jKMJhhrWrKrZObnIToJztZTppC5sVS0JagPOTiBM+1MMh8YB EwZ38Ct/xXc2c3X4O5zKTpT8RW9/N39T08Hk4lxi/QZQlC28zIyL28HRpjUw5QQolwof KQL95c1JXYa8b/h6EUI078+he8hgH/zua57Sykx4vJ5d0G3HzQX1G7pug/UbwUDvbe2/ MVI59hh4BA8f3+TmhUp72d5Ac7lQgOG1pyxKNXbmX6xUUxgm9mtKxuoM4UclBKazCTkU c9+pF/98EybCnPK84cg7ClYhsp7rxP09FPazUsrVQjhrI3/PqFKlFamkOzSxP5JQcKK/ Gx7Q== X-Received: by 10.140.101.202 with SMTP id u68mr167721qge.7.1450611952601; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 03:45:52 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.140.92.203 with SMTP id b69ls1121411qge.5.gmail; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 03:45:52 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.140.102.17 with SMTP id v17mr166079qge.9.1450611952062; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 03:45:52 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2015 03:45:51 -0800 (PST) From: guskant To: lojban Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <5673EFF1.60709@gmail.com> <63d48970-5e61-4e4e-b4f0-aa60b5561c89@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [Llg-members] A story of "Search %s" string in Vivaldi browser MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_Part_4643_551279648.1450611951206" X-Original-Sender: gusni.kantu@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Spam-Checked-In-Group: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , X-Spam-Score: -1.8 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.8 X-Spam_score_int: -17 X-Spam_bar: - ------=_Part_4643_551279648.1450611951206 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_4644_1184810773.1450611951207" ------=_Part_4644_1184810773.1450611951207 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Le dimanche 20 d=C3=A9cembre 2015 11:12:28 UTC, la gleki a =C3=A9crit : > > > > 2015-12-20 13:55 GMT+03:00 >: > >> >> >> Le dimanche 20 d=C3=A9cembre 2015 10:13:29 UTC, la gleki a =C3=A9crit : >>> >>> >>> >>> 2015-12-20 12:32 GMT+03:00 guskant : >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Le dimanche 20 d=C3=A9cembre 2015 08:57:23 UTC, la gleki a =C3=A9crit = : >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> =20 >>>>> >>>> I'm intolerant to everything beyond CLL. Even my unofficial parsers ar= e=20 >>>>> merely a playtoy, a tool to study Lojban, not to break it. >>>>> Changing Lojban is breaking its community which already happened once= =20 >>>>> in 2004. >>>>> >>>>> It's a pity that the current Lojban is probably irreversibly=20 >>>>> incompatible with CLL, I only have to accept that and perceive as if = the=20 >>>>> language is starting from scratch. But I of course can't accept if th= is is=20 >>>>> going to happen on a regular basis. That's why my intolerance over ev= en=20 >>>>> more backward incompatible changes. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Teaching {la'oi} in your course and abusing a statement in NU clause:= =20 >>>> what a double standard of you! It's you who broke so-called Lojbanista= n by=20 >>>> expelling me.=20 >>>> https://mw.lojban.org/papri/The_egocentrism_of_a_Lojban_community >>>> >>> >>> 1. I didn't expel you. I'm just documenting what people are using. As I= =20 >>> said I perceive the situation as starting the language from scratch. Bu= t=20 >>> when some person says "let's drop this usage" it's breaking communicati= on.=20 >>> >> >> You did. See the proof in the page of URL above. >> > > I don't understand that page, sorry. At all :( Don't understand reasoning= ,=20 > just nothing. You may try discussing it with other people.=20 > >> =20 >> >>> 2. Am I supposed not to teach {la'oi}? Then how one would understand=20 >>> what this {la'oi} means? >>> >> >> Simply teach that it's not Lojban. Even doing it, the learner will find= =20 >> it in jbovlaste, and understand the usage. >> > > Definition in jbovlaste are usually cryptic and the website currently=20 > lacks satisfactory tools to show examples. > Maybe instead add a notice that {la'oi} is ... I don't know what=20 > adjective to use so that it can suit you. "not mainstream", "used by some= =20 > people"? The section already has the section "usage is problematic". > > Also I not precisely explained how my course is to be used. So I clarifie= d=20 > the very first paragraph explaining the algorithm of using the course. To= =20 > use one is supposed to provide feedback. Other usage is not approved. > > I understand that readers in past could understand this course as a still= =20 > finalized book despite warnings that it was a draft. > > It's rather desirable that definition in jbovlaste is cryptic, and the=20 examples are not very reachable. New learners would avoid using {la'oi}, or= =20 supporters of {la'oi} would give a learnable non-official page of {la'oi}.= =20 Both are out of teacher's mission. =20 > >> =20 >> >>> 3. People are using {la'oi}. I don't understand how {la'oi} breaks CLL.= =20 >>> This particle is backward compatible. What problems are you having with= it?=20 >>> I can only see that for you {la'oi} is not neutral towards Polynesian= =20 >>> languages. But we already know that Lojban is not neutral. Why are you= =20 >>> accusing me of teaching it? The little blame gets all the blame? The sa= me=20 >>> as before. If one does nothing 'ey can't be blaimed. Is this what is=20 >>> desired? >>> >> >> It breaks CLL 1.1 by forcing learners cultural non-neutrality. As for th= e=20 >> correctness of CLL, use bpfk list: >> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/bpfk-list/5_SDz58KJAw/discussion >> >> =20 >> >>> 4. I don't understand what does mean "abusing a statement in NU clause"= ?=20 >>> Using {nu} where {du'u} is to be used? It's from xorxe's Alice. If ther= e is=20 >>> some underformalization going on I don't have time to resolve it when= =20 >>> everything is working anyways. >>> >>> >> No, I simply meant syntactic form "NU statement (KEI)", which require=20 >> some KEI non-elidible more than camxes. You abused also my parser parses= =20 >> differently from camxes as follows: >> >> ([{ro BOI} {mo } KU] VAU)=20 >> >> ([{ mo KU} {cu VAU}] IAU)=20 >> >> ([{ mo KU} {ge GIhI}] IAU)=20 >> >> You did then said "ja'o lo guskanbau cu banzu frica lo jbobau", which=20 >> implies that you expelled me from so-called Lojbanistan. >> > > Oh, hm. Now I see. But that reasoning also implies that I expelled myself= =20 > too .o'u. > You don't understand the proof. You speak IRC dialects, then it does not= =20 imply that you expelled yourself. Why don't you follow a primary course of= =20 Logic before teaching Lojban? =20 > =20 > >> >> You didn't mention that your parser for your course "camxes-exp" parses= =20 >> cmevla as tanru unit: it is already backward incompatible to camxes. It = is=20 >> another evidence of your double standard. >> > > Indeed, it's a mistake to be corrected. I will change to a better parser= =20 > in future but currently I lack free time. It's not double standard. I=20 > simply can't do the work for everyone. > =20 > > I also wish you sent feedback directly to me as the course asks, not=20 > collect some evidence as my own opinion. > I'm only a collector and a teacher, not a designer of languages. > > You are also an expeller of me and a de-selector of un-pleasant-to-you=20 features.=20 I recommend you not to teach any new features before admitted by BPFK.=20 Don't collect the unofficial features but obey BPFK. It is reasonable if=20 you add new features after admission of BPFK.=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 https://groups.google.com/group/lojban. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. ------=_Part_4644_1184810773.1450611951207 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Le dimanche 20 d=C3=A9cembre 2015 11:12:28 UTC, la gleki a =C3=A9cr= it=C2=A0:

=

2015-12-20 13:55 GMT+03:00 <jacfold...@gmail.com>:


Le dimanche 20 d=C3=A9cembre 2015 10:13:29 UTC, la gleki a =C3= =A9crit=C2=A0:


2015-12-20 12:32 GMT+03:00 guskan= t <gusni...@gmail.com>:


Le dimanche 20 d=C3=A9cembre 2015 08:57:23 = UTC, la gleki a =C3=A9crit=C2=A0:

=C2=A0
<= div>
I'm intolerant= to everything beyond CLL. Even my unofficial parsers are merely a playtoy,= a tool to study Lojban, not to break it.
Changing Lojban is brea= king its community which already happened once in 2004.

It's a pity that the current Lojban is probably irreversibly inco= mpatible with CLL, I only have to accept that and perceive as if the langua= ge is starting from scratch. But I of course can't accept if this is go= ing to happen on a regular basis. That's why my intolerance over even m= ore backward incompatible changes.


Teaching {la'oi} in your cou= rse and abusing a statement in NU clause: what a double standard of you! It= 's you who broke so-called Lojbanistan by expelling me.=C2=A0

= 1. I didn't expel you. I'm just documenting what people are using. = As I said I perceive the situation as starting the language from scratch. B= ut when some person says "let's drop this usage" it's bre= aking communication.=C2=A0

You did. See the proof in the page of URL above.

I don't understand that page, sorry. At all = :( Don't understand reasoning, just nothing. You may try discussing it = with other people.=C2=A0
=C2= =A0
2. Am I supposed not to teach {la'oi}? Then= how one would understand what this {la'oi} means?

Simply teach that it's not L= ojban. Even doing it, the learner will find it in jbovlaste, and understand= the usage.

Definition in jbovlaste a= re usually cryptic and the website currently lacks satisfactory tools to sh= ow examples.
Maybe instead add a notice that {la'oi} is ...= =C2=A0 I don't know what adjective to use so that it can suit you. &quo= t;not mainstream", "used by some people"? The section alread= y has the section "usage is problematic".

Also I not precisely explained how my course is to be used. So I clarifie= d the very first paragraph explaining the algorithm of using the course. To= use one is supposed to provide feedback. Other usage is not approved.

I understand that readers in past could understand thi= s course as a still finalized book despite warnings that it was a draft.


=C2=A0= It's rather desirable that definition in jbovlaste is cryptic, and the = examples are not very reachable. New learners would avoid using {la'oi}= , or supporters of {la'oi} would give a learnable non-official page of = {la'oi}. Both are out of teacher's mission.

=C2=A0
=C2=A0
3. People are using {la'= oi}. I don't understand how {la'oi} breaks CLL. This particle is ba= ckward compatible. What problems are you having with it? I can only see tha= t for you {la'oi} is not neutral towards Polynesian languages. But we a= lready know that Lojban is not neutral. Why are you accusing me of teaching= it? The little blame gets all the blame? The same as before. If one does n= othing 'ey can't be blaimed. Is this what is desired?

It breaks CLL 1.1 by forc= ing learners cultural non-neutrality. As for the correctness of CLL, use bp= fk list:
https://gr= oups.google.com/d/topic/bpfk-list/5_SDz58KJAw/discussion
<= /div>

=C2=A0
4. I don'= t understand what does mean "abusing a statement in NU clause"? U= sing {nu} where {du'u} is to be used? It's from xorxe's Alice. = If there is some underformalization going on I don't have time to resol= ve it when everything is working anyways.


No, I simply meant syntact= ic form "NU statement (KEI)", which require some KEI non-elidible= more than camxes. You abused also my parser parses differently from camxes= as follows:

([{ro BOI} {mo <ge mo (=C2=B9= gi mo=C2=B9) GIhI>} KU] VAU)=C2=A0

([{<ro BO= I> mo KU} {cu <ge mo (=C2=B9gi mo=C2=B9) GIhI> VAU}] IAU)=C2=A0

([{<ro BOI> mo KU} {ge <cu (=C2=B9mo VAU=C2= =B9)> <gi (=C2=B9CU [mo VAU]=C2=B9)> GIhI}] IAU)=C2=A0
<= /div>

You did then said "ja&#= 39;o lo=C2=A0guskanbau=C2=A0c= u banzu frica lo jbobau", which implies that you expelled me from so-c= alled Lojbanistan.

Oh, hm. Now= I see. But that reasoning also implies that I expelled myself too .o'u= .

You don't und= erstand the proof. You speak IRC dialects, =C2=A0then it does not imply tha= t you expelled yourself. Why don't you follow a primary course of Logic= before teaching Lojban?
=C2=A0
=C2= =A0

You didn't mention that your parser for your co= urse "camxes-exp" parses cmevla as tanru unit: it is already back= ward incompatible to camxes. It is another evidence of your double standard= .

Indeed, it's a mistake t= o be corrected. I will change to a better parser in future but currently I = lack free time. It's not double standard. I simply can't do the wor= k for everyone.
=C2=A0

I also wish you s= ent feedback directly to me as the course asks, not collect some evidence a= s my own opinion.
I'm only a collector and a teacher, not a d= esigner of languages.


You are also an expeller of me and a de-selector of un-pleasant-to-y= ou features.=C2=A0

I recommend you not to teach an= y new features before admitted by BPFK. Don't collect the unofficial fe= atures but obey BPFK. It is reasonable if you add new features after admiss= ion of BPFK.=C2=A0

--
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= s://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
------=_Part_4644_1184810773.1450611951207-- ------=_Part_4643_551279648.1450611951206--