Received: from mail-ua0-f184.google.com ([209.85.217.184]:56214) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eFgBw-0005ja-En for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Fri, 17 Nov 2017 04:56:22 -0800 Received: by mail-ua0-f184.google.com with SMTP id 21sf940931uas.22 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 2017 04:56:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe; bh=Bgga3hbT9gdhRVbzhJoLuJWGjke13lUZz05I15vVL1Q=; b=poBH0IqNi7hDwBTLt7tj/YpZ9PFmd9IqiWKJ6P6DgUGRkcR7c5D7OpyXY7SfNugNH0 AGaFfBDD/80SnmufoCVmatoaKCV5dzQYV7KdMDD7PdZB+1279LYZMTgfvvKOmr/dohwK N7cGE1erbr7gNrbPT8pLvOHnkiTemCX/4476liK7fapX8CtBxmnNrX0hQhv66rt6TMUI pyiEkyUHUM1BSh6yyyLzkauDIoBRN1N/QqnZ6iTNA8KGiQgeyaG7F7bIu03bdhwoco1a tEDH+OhOpeJBMylP9eAZJtG6GQmYm1OYbuNcf0tNGVDF1bp/gtvUfNrjGDepClmps0ce QcoQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version :x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=Bgga3hbT9gdhRVbzhJoLuJWGjke13lUZz05I15vVL1Q=; b=SYQuXCCgevD73q+co8DzpaObWlkmlotiatV00d49tDrM0Sbwofk2ktFHGxBfySvyNo VA9fkUX5MZ0NhHpFvaT3wOtBolcxagnRt+vlivAJC0FD3Y3THOIeTTCSfoNUv1DhMYj0 9xs4KXlgjfy5xZk0UmSbyTiYx+8/RsCGleFkOs2xf/QI7KYhTvU+qGOK6s53WOmVLK0n HXK9JnTtX81KCs2uxb0fUIULb2igs+ScYdFn5LShHc8AIPxAkgrQjODhNsWyorJU5wIX HSnWm7Xk+hFHXZDkTWxt9o6eP9dGG0R/eCLDtbjZTo632TWnFi40X4T7sLap+7k1uOJA tceA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=sender:x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to :references:subject:mime-version:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post :list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=Bgga3hbT9gdhRVbzhJoLuJWGjke13lUZz05I15vVL1Q=; b=ZxBecr7pwEubY6btRQuM3PPUCN59BSrsK//Q+Mk+Ne6GHG9f0MYmsGbTrmzfrga5gF FaCi8Hr5sT1Otu08SsQ8ORDJULNqqQ0nAOl1Ev3ASf14k/9vuu+fy0OUDHDXbXkA9jsM J+vW0D7gNjnPaDl0wmo/1+IcDJfWiu898AmRQyE/nVIFV+3Xjh3hfe8KWD0u2aFNbOST YBCmJ7o+lT+scRqBvQ9h7PAPFzCQ+tfVDgvXgTmewSG1nTBID992uav4n0VyADZ77stD J/rRg1VVQQD45Zj9ttz6jPehcKEMvutLgTIBuhQYCyfRx+13+lPFxFrT3mrchltdMg1k mlPQ== Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX6H/nUc/PBEGeFWsBGdKYfjVi8mqxviXPQFZwoxgs6zsNAjOCTc dpIst0KMlJFiMwos9esMhlY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMYGB0XC8dRX/8SC/rrzA0zN27ZeiUjncOOVZ7nN5pWNDO7hMvwda9OitXPLjarUlVB3h6D2kQ== X-Received: by 10.31.151.199 with SMTP id z190mr162640vkd.4.1510923374044; Fri, 17 Nov 2017 04:56:14 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.31.131.146 with SMTP id f140ls1162700vkd.13.gmail; Fri, 17 Nov 2017 04:56:13 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.31.48.213 with SMTP id w204mr441306vkw.12.1510923373206; Fri, 17 Nov 2017 04:56:13 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 04:56:12 -0800 (PST) From: sukender1@gmail.com To: lojban Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <78156dc5-1fb3-4e9d-992c-a8f30facc4fd@googlegroups.com> <963393d6-a9f1-4232-be13-b4ee76eb69e1@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_Part_3373_1095891960.1510923373055" X-Original-Sender: sukender1@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_3373_1095891960.1510923373055 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_3374_1727938725.1510923373056" ------=_Part_3374_1727938725.1510923373056 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It seems groups are much fuzzier than expected. Individual may accept to: - Improve, *non *backward-compatible way (=3D anything) - Bug-fix, *non *backward-compatible way - Improve, backward-compatible way (including additions) - Do nothing at all =20 These choices may apply to logic and grammar, leading to 4^2 =3D 16 possibl= e=20 combinations, even though some combinations are highly improbable and some= =20 others contain simply very few people (as la .guskant. said about former=20 "group 2"). If we add "semantics" to logic and grammar, we get to 4^3 =3D 6= 4.=20 And if we add "No idea on the topic" as a choice, we got 5^3 =3D 125. And inside some combinations, we find people in favor of X or Y proposition= =20 (Zasni Gerna of Xorxes, Solpahi's connectives, Zantufa...). which increases= =20 again the number of cases. (Please note that I did not add "Bug-fix, backward-compatible" because from= =20 what I read, it seems merely impossible (correct me if I'm wrong). Else=20 we'd have 6^3 =3D 216.) So better not trying to but people in 3 "labeled compartments", I guess!=20 That leads me to the conclusion that submissions must be *evaluated* on a *= per-case=20 basis*, with a stable and well-known *evaluation grid*. *** Now about organizations. I feel like the separation between BPFK and the GIT repositories maintained= =20 by the Coders' Group is nonsense (from an pure organizational point of=20 view). I foresee multiple possible outcomes: 1. Nothing changes: BPFK discusses/votes things that will never be=20 included, and the Coders' Group include things that will never be=20 discussed/voted. Lojban dies. 2. Pure schism: each group "wakes up" (=3Dbecomes more active) and decid= es=20 to build its own language. What will emerge is unclear to me. One sure= =20 thing is that the small community will be split into two (or more) weake= r=20 ones. 3. Put in common: =20 - By cooperation: groups (or some members) agree to work together (or=20 merge) with proper means, common rules and common tools. That require= s=20 adhesion and (good) tools. - Cooperation may happen with renewal: groups may agree to create= =20 a new entity with new (or updated) rules. - By dissolution: one group may simply dissolve, leaving the other=20 one the only "official". I personally think this is dangerous because= we=20 surely need the point of view of everybody. - By forcing: One group may force the other to accept its own way to= =20 work. The most obvious case would be preempting ("pull the rug out to= "):=20 BPFK could fork repositories and tag them as "BPFK Official" or whate= ver.=20 This is unfair, but perfectly legal. =20 Of course, cases may be partial and mixed: some members may join the other= =20 group, while other create a new entity or a new language, etc. I just hope= =20 people won't be dumb enough to create a worse situation. (The terms you were looking for are "compromises" and "trade-off"... ;-) ) That leads me to the conclusion that submission protocol/rules are to be=20 *proposed*, discussed and accepted by a wide range of people. I won't enter= =20 pure language discussions, as I don't feel legitimate for this. But I'll=20 try to propose solutions to help about rules and protocols. Any idea is=20 welcome of course. la .sykyndyr. Le jeudi 16 novembre 2017 17:50:53 UTC+1, guskant a =C3=A9crit : > > > > Le jeudi 16 novembre 2017 16:21:09 UTC, Benoit Neil a =C3=A9crit : >> >> I'll answer more in detail soon, but in the meantime, can you tell us=20 >> more about "Group 3 consist[ing] of some incompatible groups"? Which=20 >> subgroups, actually? >> ki'e >> >> la .sykyndyr. >> >> > The earliest subgroup of Group 3 is supporters of Zasni Gerna of Xorxes: > https://mw.lojban.org/papri/zasni_gerna > > The second wave should be supporters of Solpahi's connective sistem: > > http://selpahi.weebly.com/lojban/how-to-substantially-simplify-the-lojban= -connective-system-my-connective-system > > The third wave should be my Zantufa. It implemented most of both Xorxes's= =20 > and Solpahi's, and modified much more the forethought connectives and the= =20 > mathematical expressions. > https://mw.lojban.org/papri/zantufa_jonma%27o_smuni > https://mw.lojban.org/papri/zantufa_mekso > > Gleki mentioned the function words proposed by Curtis Franks as if they= =20 > would belong to Group 3, but those modifications should be regarded as a= =20 > part of the CLL according to the description in Section 4.2 of it: "addin= g=20 > grammatical mechanisms". > > There are also many proposals used by people chatting in IRC lojban group= ,=20 > but most of them seem to be in the category of Section 4.2 of the CLL as= =20 > well. > > mi'e la Guskant > --=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_3374_1727938725.1510923373056 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
It seems groups are much fuzzier than expected. Indiv= idual may accept to:
  • Improve, non backward-compati= ble way (=3D anything)
  • Bug-fix, non backward-compatible = way
  • Improve, backward-compatible way (including additions)
    <= /li>
  • Do nothing at all
These choices may apply t= o logic and grammar, leading to 4^2 =3D 16 possible combinations, even thou= gh some combinations are highly improbable and some others contain simply v= ery few people (as la .guskant. said about former "group 2"). If = we add "semantics" to logic and grammar, we get to 4^3 =3D 64. An= d if we add "No idea on the topic" as a choice, we got 5^3 =3D 12= 5.
And inside some combinations, we find people in favor of X= or Y proposition (Zasni Gerna of Xorxes, Solpahi's connectives, Zantuf= a...). which increases again the number of cases.
(Please note th= at I did not add "Bug-fix, backward-compatible" because from what= I read, it seems merely impossible (correct me if I'm wrong). Else we&= #39;d have 6^3 =3D 216.)

So better not trying to b= ut people in 3 "labeled compartments", I guess! That leads me to = the conclusion that submissions must be evaluated on a per-case b= asis, with a stable and well-known evaluation grid.
***

Now about organizations.
I feel like the separation between BPFK and the GIT repositories maintain= ed by the Coders' Group is nonsense (from an pure organizational point = of view). I foresee multiple possible outcomes:
  1. Nothing c= hanges: BPFK discusses/votes things that will never be included, and the Co= ders' Group include things that will never be discussed/voted. Lojban d= ies.
  2. Pure schism: each group "wakes up" (=3Dbecomes m= ore active) and decides to build its own language. What will emerge is uncl= ear to me. One sure thing is that the small community will be split into tw= o (or more) weaker ones.
  3. Put in common:
    • By cooperation: groups (or some members) agree to work togethe= r (or merge) with proper means, common rules and common tools. That require= s adhesion and (good) tools.
      • Cooperation may happen with renewa= l: groups may agree to create a new entity with new (or updated) rules.
    • By dissolution: one group may simply dissolve, leaving the other = one the only "official". I personally think this is dangerous bec= ause we surely need the point of view of everybody.
    • By forcing: One= group may force the other to accept its own way to work. The most obvious = case would be preempting ("pull the rug out to"): BPFK could fork= repositories and tag them as "BPFK Official" or whatever. This i= s unfair, but perfectly legal.
Of course, cases ma= y be partial and mixed: some members may join the other group, while other = create a new entity or a new language, etc. I just hope people won't be= dumb enough to create a worse situation.
(The terms you were loo= king for are "compromises" and "trade-off"... ;-) )

That leads me to the conclusion that submission proto= col/rules are to be proposed, discussed and accepted by a wide range= of people. I won't enter pure language discussions, as I don't fee= l legitimate for this. But I'll try to propose solutions to help about = rules and protocols. Any idea is welcome of course.

la .sykyndyr.


Le jeudi 16 novembre 2017 17:50:53 = UTC+1, guskant a =C3=A9crit=C2=A0:


Le jeudi 16 novembre 2017 16:21:09 UTC, Beno= it Neil a =C3=A9crit=C2=A0:
I&#= 39;ll answer more in detail soon, but in the meantime, can you tell us more= about "Group 3 consist[ing] of some incompatible groups"? Which = subgroups, actually?
ki'e

la .sykyndyr.


The earliest subgroup of Group 3 is supporters of Za= sni Gerna of Xorxes:

The = second wave should be supporters of Solpahi's connective sistem:
<= div>http://selpahi.weebly.com/lojban/how-= to-substantially-simplify-the-lojban-connective-system-my-co= nnective-system

The third wave should be m= y Zantufa. It implemented most of both Xorxes's and Solpahi's, and = modified much more the forethought connectives and the mathematical express= ions.

Gleki men= tioned the function words proposed by Curtis Franks as if they would belong= to Group 3, but those modifications should be regarded as a part of the CL= L according to the description in Section 4.2 of it: "adding grammatic= al mechanisms".

There are also many proposals used by pe= ople chatting in IRC lojban group, but most of them seem to be in the categ= ory of Section 4.2 of the CLL as well.

mi'= e la Guskant

--
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_3374_1727938725.1510923373056-- ------=_Part_3373_1095891960.1510923373055--