Received: from mail-vk0-f64.google.com ([209.85.213.64]:33687) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eHUwJ-0001Uu-Km for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 05:19:46 -0800 Received: by mail-vk0-f64.google.com with SMTP id n63sf9307976vkf.0 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 05:19:43 -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=vRBPXKAj+fUfhdHmlp0gusFfzvp8l7WIsTgDdFcsHmk=; b=WyDMIe4HkgCfXnstVsyV5aAHmmGgjUeshkD2+s7WIDMcd8/CzWOE5P0zh9QBTKzYXD HVgzXZox+9SYy8mnwMTdh9BTHIKIPd+rqlixDOMH8i+ji5SHbJZpkSYPdMv2xPMb3fjA ABkABr6/kUdpuyyO7C/Yc5FObEOCxX7tXsiOTDrWGPEeupXWSCCepC3yc/Hb92nc0HHP egnPDBRQ9Z0gLFBbWT5utDzUmZzVgem//rSDFk+kLKncMNlYNwEX0d/6qfaRBoBqPmQn NDAA8bedyczsdAOEzI55+u9PARchGC/ezgbfbArthTapyXrZyjDan294+LHR9uyLdBlv UrAw== 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=vRBPXKAj+fUfhdHmlp0gusFfzvp8l7WIsTgDdFcsHmk=; b=WOeI1RdCMxsiomijETHWtunwubMUw/q8ebMOHns+imPZxgtM0p+TKM/nbQmf8+z4Mm xL21tnlrWfLJgirJkP/RvFrCJixDnvlMJix+bk9zLWKZFsefzuxTuVWhSaf5sLyhe2SB sAU4nb8n7ZYG6RQxzAwHIJqFCeofOhy342+zdYe5o7v13y6qbekCdx2yTZznPSk0i1yr SUbPXJDpesmqiujNiZTzgUEr1eYCmPvkE/eSphPHEWnw5GFdfs/0GjwOkyjPKxsl6/qa KahUvzmfDsx47/ouO1P+2jyuvDsJ64YV2pD8n5ojdeF35f4OSwfE4ApjHc65LleC4jcc Q73A== 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=vRBPXKAj+fUfhdHmlp0gusFfzvp8l7WIsTgDdFcsHmk=; b=hdO0G4cNWVyW7VgsiNBkRMyGO7M4CPFDerWHWK86eKvcz4NsTo8uh8BPn6FoRA7LqJ 4AANUF+RAZ3bM6n9N3Wxsjzt5XjapvxC2BQ79Gz4u7Cb7dP1ak6Q7dReGnV5M4Fka57L odxcE3t+oDQaP74kyiJX/hLUC7YezZ+M5ZPbU/C25rrwPPxd56Ku7YsKemG8shS4A7xA QRHy10MHzOW4qCkn6eohYdePgbvnJBUqucfZ1Ifkx7cXsGoJFkhGzVOyAwSGxNZamEui fJsadlZh8UOd7oEVHew6nz/rOinQOAWQsNAJVWR3Q98So8zR76hfgAFSporZ9ywd38q4 W3Xw== Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX58AseS/X4kMTafo0QDA9rnt5rnYu/r5Bu1f44pbHyjJ4iTX+UR Ms/Z6/SgACDG7fYax117q+M= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMar8s+7bHsLN+RWIpSf8JMgXdWdOebU4SE3KklLMWL5YFeCd05gJyfFd5pNW8+eS/yBS5ovyg== X-Received: by 10.31.48.213 with SMTP id w204mr1854492vkw.12.1511356777169; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 05:19:37 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.176.4.79 with SMTP id 73ls1140191uav.12.gmail; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 05:19:36 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.31.168.133 with SMTP id r127mr1852448vke.8.1511356776461; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 05:19:36 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 05:19:36 -0800 (PST) From: sukender1@gmail.com To: lojban Message-Id: <84e8285a-b8f3-4665-a9fd-9cde31816952@googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: References: <78156dc5-1fb3-4e9d-992c-a8f30facc4fd@googlegroups.com> <963393d6-a9f1-4232-be13-b4ee76eb69e1@googlegroups.com> <7d063690-0550-45d6-9779-3334ac8e17b5@googlegroups.com> <85ecf653-49c8-457c-8397-d80fc0c3a8ea@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_Part_10521_482952007.1511356776321" 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: -4.1 (----) X-Spam_score: -4.1 X-Spam_score_int: -40 X-Spam_bar: ---- ------=_Part_10521_482952007.1511356776321 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_10522_414167333.1511356776321" ------=_Part_10522_414167333.1511356776321 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > For me, the formal grammar is meant for machines and for tools creators; >> in this respect I find PEG to be clearer and easier to use that CFG. >> > > That's beside the point of this discussion. la .sykyndyr. proposed relying > on the opinion of people who don't understand the subject. > Hm, let me add precisions: - My proposition is to make users (= "anyone registered") give rights to the ones they define as "experts". Users don't give their vote on submissions. This is indirect. - This is "the least bad" way to define experts for now. Current definition is worse. Algorithms I told about are worse. - This system is not meant to be perfect. This system is meant to be feasible. And any improvements are welcome, of course. - This system may surely evolve and/or be replaced later on. - The "experts" (as defined) would then have the responsibility of saying either "Yes, I can tackle this submission" (and vote) or "No, I can't" (and abstain). - I rely on probability and statistics to ensure the system is stable and robust enough. So yes, the less users, the more unstable. -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/lojban. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. ------=_Part_10522_414167333.1511356776321 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
For me, th= e formal grammar is meant for machines and for tools creators; in this resp= ect I find PEG to be clearer and easier to use that CFG.
<= /div>

That's beside the point of this d= iscussion. la .sykyndyr. proposed relying on the opinion of people who don&= #39;t understand the subject.

=
Hm, let me add precisions:
  • My proposition is t= o make users (=3D "anyone registered") give rights to the ones th= ey define as "experts". Users don't give their vote on submis= sions. This is indirect.
    • This is "the least bad" way = to define experts for now. Current definition is worse. Algorithms I told a= bout are worse.
    • This system is not meant to be perfect. This system= is meant to be feasible. And any improvements are welcome, of course.
    • =
    • This system may surely evolve and/or be replaced later on.
    The "experts" (as defined) would then have the responsibility of= saying either "Yes, I can tackle this submission" (and vote) or = "No, I can't" (and abstain).
  • I rely on probabilit= y and statistics to ensure the system is stable and robust enough. So yes, = the less users, the more unstable.

--
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_10522_414167333.1511356776321-- ------=_Part_10521_482952007.1511356776321--