Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lytlesw@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400e:c01::234 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400e:c01::234;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <SY3PR01MB08735626A69F855470F6FD40EB050@SY3PR01MB0873.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com>
References: <ef141db1-9811-4d44-8458-972ddffdd883@googlegroups.com>
 <78156dc5-1fb3-4e9d-992c-a8f30facc4fd@googlegroups.com> <SY3PR01MB0873C992D556B090F308980EEB510@SY3PR01MB0873.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <6ab2b9c0-560a-409f-8ec5-c3f8eaa09041@googlegroups.com> <SY3PR01MB08735626A69F855470F6FD40EB050@SY3PR01MB0873.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com>
From: MorphemeAddict <lytlesw@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2017 22:47:05 -0600
Message-ID: <CAHiXx=OOb=3R1V9kL0+1HfWzqgUgaQhWRhe_h7uH7=7nfQvYZg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e08243688d214f00561735420"
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: -4.6
X-Spam_score_int: -45
X-Spam_bar: ----

--089e08243688d214f00561735420
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

While backwards-compatibility is important to some people, it is not so
important to others. I'd rather see a much improved version, usually done
by simplification, that wasn't backwards-compatible than to maintain
backwards-compatibility and lose the opportunity for a (much) better
language.

stevo

<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Timothy Lawrence <
timothy.lawrence@connect.qut.edu.au> wrote:

> My apologies for the confusion. I tried to Lojbanise my name (Timotheos or
> Timothy) but that doesn't make it easily searchable (and the name doesn't
> Lojbanise that well anyway), so I'll try to keep with the name I have on my
> email client.
>
>
> I think karis was referring to this email (included below)? I meant to
> continue my input into the discussion but time escaped me this year!
>
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> Timothy
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* lojban@googlegroups.com <lojban@googlegroups.com> on behalf of
> Timothy Lawrence <timothy.lawrence@connect.qut.edu.au>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, 7 November 2017 11:49 PM
> *To:* lojban
> *Subject:* Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban
>
> *"You can learn the language described here with assurance that it will
> not be subject to further fiddling by language-meisters."*
> - Complete Lojban Language http://lojban.github.io/cll/1/2/
>
> I only use CLL Lojban. I believe that an unambiguous language needs to
> have a central, singular version to stay unambiguous.
>
> I don't know much about the history of OpenGL but it, from a surface
> level, seems similar to the history of C++, which I am familiar with.
> By and large, new features are added to the C++ language, but every
> version is backwards-compatible
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backward_compatibility> with older
> versions (and almost entirely compatible with its predecessor, C).
> An older compiler might choke on new language features, but a new compiler
> will always work with old code.
>
> Compiler vendors may introduce their own language features as forks (and
> they are not considered standard C++), but there is always a
> standard/"strict" mode that can be enabled. Most good features that
> compilers introduce have been added to the official version, perhaps
> changed in a way to integrate them better.
>
> This is what I think Lojban should be like.
>
> *I want all new / official Lojban versions to be CLL-compatible.*
>
>
>
> *> "jbo_*" (imagine "jbo_FR", "jbo_EN", "jbo_CA"...),*
>
> I do not want there to be "jbo_A", "jbo_B", "jbo_C"... that are all
> incompatible.
>
> I do want "jbo_1", "jbo_2", "jbo_3"..., where it's a sequential chronology
> and each is a more improved (but backwards-compatible) version.
>
> A tool could explicitly support "jbo_2" and it would implicitly support
> "jbo_1". If a tool just says it supports "jbo", it would be presumed to
> support the latest.
>
>
>
> *> But this group ("committee"?) should accept the fact that language will
> evolve, whether they like it or not.*
>
> I hope that this means that they accept the language can change, by
> backwards-compatible design and *not* evolution via drift.
>
> C++ does not at all "evolve" like a natural language and I don't think
> Lojban should, either. Because C++ has maintained a centralised standard
> and continued to update, I think it possible for Lojban to do so.
>
>
>
> *> What is clear, however, is that people don't want to use CLL Lojban
> (despite the fact that it is still the most thoroughly documented version).*
>
> I do. I think most people want to use the latest version of something. I
> see the CLL Lojban as the latest version, for the backwards-compatibility
> reasons mentioned above.
>
> I have seen CLL-incompatible versions advertised on the website and new
> learners are likely to intuit that it's intrinsically better to choose the
> "latest version", not knowing that learning the modern versions entails
> embracing a schism.
>
> *> To be frank, I feel a bit betrayed. I feel bad because my hope was that
> Lojban was more that just an experiment. Someone, please, prove me it is...*
>
> This is so true for me, and one of the reasons that I became more quiet
> (although I am writing an unannounced novel that contains CLL Lojban).
>
> *> I just don't want to spend time learning things if they would be thrown
> away in a few months/years*
>
> *> sykynder: You mention re-integrating forks back into the core language.
> How do you change something and then make it the same as it was before?*
>
> I believe all official Lojban changes must be backwards-compatible for
> Lojban to succeed in its goal of being unambiguous (let alone succeed in
> other ways, such as adoption).
>
>
>
> *> E.g. learning a revised meaning {lo} is no big deal.*
>
> It's not just about learning, it's about effort invested in writing tools,
> texts, chatbots and parsers (et cetera).
> It's about breaking that promise in the CLL that the language will not be
> subject to further fiddling.
>
> Introducing changes that break Lojban compatibility will
> - waste invested time in the older version
> - waste invested money in buying the older CLL (etc)
> - alienate those who wasted their time/money
> - introduce more ambiguity (The Lojban version changes the meaning!!)
>
> (Why did CLL-{le} become modern-{lo} and the modern-{le} get introduced,
> instead of just introducing the new {lo} to mean what modern-{le} means and
> keeping CLL-{le} as the default?)
>
> As learning a revised meaning is no big deal, simply redoing these changes
> to be compatible with CLL Lojban should be no big deal ;)
>
>
>
> *"Lojban does not yet have nearly the vocabulary it needs to be a fully
> usable language of the modern world"*
> - Complete Lojban Language http://lojban.github.io/cll/1/2/
>
> If we can agree to move forward using CLL Lojban and only make
> backwards-compatible changes, then I can personally say I'll be happy to
> resume devoting time, energy and money into Lojban. Lojban's usefulness as
> an unambiguous language is so important to me.
>
> It doesn't have to be "perfect" or "better", it just has to be unambiguous
> and complete.
>
>
> I want to help complete Lojban, and any processes of governance
> surrounding it, to reunite it.
>
> Thanks for reading,
>
> mi'e la timoteios.
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* lojban@googlegroups.com <lojban@googlegroups.com> on behalf of
> gryphkat@gmail.com <gryphkat@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, 25 December 2017 2:55 AM
> *To:* lojban
> *Subject:* Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban
>
> WOW! Timoteos states _exactly_ what I believe is the _best_ path for
> lojban,and quite clearly. I have said this before and hope it receives more
> positive attention this time because of the venue and clarity.
>
> This lack of backwards compatability I have run into sometimes, despite
> being told that everyone would understand me, is one major reason I stopped
> working on learning learning lojban about the time of the first schism.
>
> .karis.
>
> --
> 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.
>
> --
> 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.
>

-- 
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.

--089e08243688d214f00561735420
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:courier =
new,monospace">While backwards-compatibility is important to some people, i=
t is not so important to others. I&#39;d rather see a much improved version=
, usually done by simplification, that wasn&#39;t backwards-compatible than=
 to maintain backwards-compatibility and lose the opportunity for a (much) =
better language.=C2=A0</div><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-fami=
ly:courier new,monospace"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"f=
ont-family:courier new,monospace">stevo</div></div><div id=3D"DAB4FAD8-2DD7=
-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><br>
<table style=3D"border-top:1px solid #d3d4de">
	<tr>
        <td style=3D"width:55px;padding-top:13px"><a href=3D"https://www.av=
ast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=3Demail&amp;utm_source=3Dlink&amp;utm_campaign=
=3Dsig-email&amp;utm_content=3Dwebmail&amp;utm_term=3Dicon" target=3D"_blan=
k"><img src=3D"https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-rou=
nd-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif" alt=3D"" width=3D"46" height=3D"29" st=
yle=3D"width: 46px; height: 29px;"></a></td>
		<td style=3D"width:470px;padding-top:12px;color:#41424e;font-size:13px;fo=
nt-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;line-height:18px">Virus-free. <a href=
=3D"https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=3Demail&amp;utm_source=3Dlin=
k&amp;utm_campaign=3Dsig-email&amp;utm_content=3Dwebmail&amp;utm_term=3Dlin=
k" target=3D"_blank" style=3D"color:#4453ea">www.avast.com</a>
		</td>
	</tr>
</table><a href=3D"#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2" width=3D"1" heigh=
t=3D"1"></a></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"=
>On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Timothy Lawrence <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a=
 href=3D"mailto:timothy.lawrence@connect.qut.edu.au" target=3D"_blank">timo=
thy.lawrence@connect.qut.edu.au</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=
=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padd=
ing-left:1ex">


<div dir=3D"ltr">
<div id=3D"m_2832786293736650618divtagdefaultwrapper" style=3D"font-size:10=
pt;color:#000000;font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif" dir=3D"ltr">
<p style=3D"margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">My apologies for the confusion. I=
 tried to Lojbanise my name (Timotheos or Timothy) but that doesn&#39;t mak=
e it easily searchable (and the name doesn&#39;t Lojbanise that well anyway=
), so I&#39;ll try to keep with the name I have
 on my email client.</p>
<p style=3D"margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"><br>
</p>
<p style=3D"margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">I think karis was referring to th=
is email (included below)? I meant to continue my input into the discussion=
 but time escaped me this year!</p>
<p style=3D"margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"><br>
</p>
<p style=3D"margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">Hope this helps,</p>
<p style=3D"margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">Timothy<br>
</p>
<br>
<hr style=3D"display:inline-block;width:98%">
<div id=3D"m_2832786293736650618divRplyFwdMsg" dir=3D"ltr"><font style=3D"f=
ont-size:11pt" face=3D"Calibri, sans-serif" color=3D"#000000"><b>From:</b> =
<a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com" target=3D"_blank">lojban@googleg=
roups.com</a> &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com" target=3D"_bla=
nk">lojban@googlegroups.com</a>&gt; on behalf of Timothy Lawrence &lt;<a hr=
ef=3D"mailto:timothy.lawrence@connect.qut.edu.au" target=3D"_blank">timothy=
.lawrence@connect.qut.<wbr>edu.au</a>&gt;<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, 7 November 2017 11:49 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> lojban<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban</font>
<div>=C2=A0</div>
</div>
<div><i>&quot;You can learn the language described here with assurance that=
 it will not be subject to further fiddling by language-meisters.&quot;</i>=
<br>
- Complete Lojban Language <a id=3D"m_2832786293736650618LPlnk252822" href=
=3D"http://lojban.github.io/cll/1/2/" class=3D"m_2832786293736650618x_OWAAu=
toLink" target=3D"_blank">
http://lojban.github.io/cll/1/<wbr>2/</a> <br>
<br>
I only use CLL Lojban. I believe that an unambiguous language needs to have=
 a central, singular version to stay unambiguous.<br>
<br>
I don&#39;t know much about the history of OpenGL but it, from a surface le=
vel, seems similar to the history of C++, which I am familiar with.<br>
By and large, new features are added to the C++ language, but every version=
 is <a href=3D"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backward_compatibility" class=
=3D"m_2832786293736650618x_OWAAutoLink" target=3D"_blank">
backwards-compatible</a> with older versions (and almost entirely compatibl=
e with its predecessor, C).<br>
An older compiler might choke on new language features, but a new compiler =
will always work with old code.<br>
<br>
Compiler vendors may introduce their own language features as forks (and th=
ey are not considered standard C++), but there is always a standard/&quot;s=
trict&quot; mode that can be enabled. Most good features that compilers int=
roduce have been added to the official version,
 perhaps changed in a way to integrate them better.<br>
<br>
This is what I think Lojban should be like.<br>
<br>
<u>I want all new / official Lojban versions to be CLL-compatible.</u><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<b>&gt; <span style=3D"color:rgb(117,123,128)">&quot;jbo_*&quot; (imagine &=
quot;jbo_FR&quot;, &quot;jbo_EN&quot;, &quot;jbo_CA&quot;...),</span></b><b=
r>
<br>
I do not want there to be &quot;jbo_A&quot;, &quot;jbo_B&quot;, &quot;jbo_C=
&quot;... that are all incompatible.<br>
<br>
I do want &quot;jbo_1&quot;, &quot;jbo_2&quot;, &quot;jbo_3&quot;..., where=
 it&#39;s a sequential chronology and each is a more improved (but backward=
s-compatible) version.<br>
<br>
A tool could explicitly support &quot;jbo_2&quot; and it would implicitly s=
upport &quot;jbo_1&quot;. If a tool just says it supports &quot;jbo&quot;, =
it would be presumed to support the latest.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<b>&gt; <span style=3D"color:rgb(117,123,128)">But this group (&quot;commit=
tee&quot;?) should accept the fact that language will evolve, whether they =
like it or not.</span></b><br>
<br>
I hope that this means that they accept the language can change, by backwar=
ds-compatible design and
<i>not</i> evolution via drift.<br>
<br>
C++ does not at all &quot;evolve&quot; like a natural language and I don=
9;t think Lojban should, either. Because C++ has maintained a centralised s=
tandard and continued to update, I think it possible for Lojban to do so.<b=
r>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<b>&gt; <span style=3D"color:rgb(117,123,128)">What is clear, however, is t=
hat people don&#39;t want to use CLL Lojban (despite the fact that it is st=
ill the most thoroughly documented version).</span></b><br>
<br>
I do. I think most people want to use the latest version of something. I se=
e the CLL Lojban as the latest version, for the backwards-compatibility rea=
sons mentioned above.<br>
<br>
I have seen CLL-incompatible versions advertised on the website and new lea=
rners are likely to intuit that it&#39;s intrinsically better to choose the=
 &quot;latest version&quot;, not knowing that learning the modern versions =
entails embracing a schism.<br>
<br>
<b>&gt; <span style=3D"color:rgb(117,123,128)">To be frank, I feel a bit be=
trayed. I feel bad because my hope was that Lojban was more that just an ex=
periment. Someone, please, prove me it is...</span></b><br>
<br>
This is so true for me, and one of the reasons that I became more quiet (al=
though I am writing an unannounced novel that contains CLL Lojban).<br>
<br>
<b>&gt; <span style=3D"color:rgb(117,123,128)">I just don&#39;t want to spe=
nd time learning things if they would be thrown away in a few months/years<=
/span></b><br>
<br>
<b>&gt; <span style=3D"color:rgb(117,123,128)">sykynder: You mention re-int=
egrating forks back into the core language. How do you change something and=
 then make it the same as it was before?</span></b><br>
<br>
I believe all official Lojban changes must be backwards-compatible for Lojb=
an to succeed in its goal of being unambiguous (let alone succeed in other =
ways, such as adoption).<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<b>&gt; <span style=3D"color:rgb(117,123,128)">E.g. learning a revised mean=
ing {lo} is no big deal.</span></b><br>
<br>
It&#39;s not just about learning, it&#39;s about effort invested in writing=
 tools, texts, chatbots and parsers (et cetera).<br>
It&#39;s about breaking that promise in the CLL that the language will not =
be subject to further fiddling.<br>
<br>
Introducing changes that break Lojban compatibility will<br>
- waste invested time in the older version<br>
- waste invested money in buying the older CLL (etc)<br>
- alienate those who wasted their time/money<br>
- introduce more ambiguity (The Lojban version changes the meaning!!)<br>
<br>
(Why did CLL-{le} become modern-{lo} and the modern-{le} get introduced, in=
stead of just introducing the new {lo} to mean what modern-{le} means and k=
eeping CLL-{le} as the default?)<br>
<br>
As learning a revised meaning is no big deal, simply redoing these changes =
to be compatible with CLL Lojban should be no big deal ;)<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<i>&quot;Lojban does not yet have nearly the vocabulary it needs to be a fu=
lly usable language of the modern world&quot;</i><br>
- Complete Lojban Language <a id=3D"m_2832786293736650618LPlnk766371" href=
=3D"http://lojban.github.io/cll/1/2/" class=3D"m_2832786293736650618x_OWAAu=
toLink" target=3D"_blank">
http://lojban.github.io/cll/1/<wbr>2/</a> <br>
<br>
If we can agree to move forward using CLL Lojban and only make backwards-co=
mpatible changes, then I can personally say I&#39;ll be happy to resume dev=
oting time, energy and money into Lojban. Lojban&#39;s usefulness as an una=
mbiguous language is so important to me.<br>
<br>
It doesn&#39;t have to be &quot;perfect&quot; or &quot;better&quot;, it jus=
t has to be unambiguous and complete.<br>
<br>
<br>
I want to help complete Lojban, and any processes of governance surrounding=
 it, to reunite it.</div>
<br>
<p>Thanks for reading,<br>
</p>
<br>
<span>mi&#39;e la timoteios.</span><br>
<br>
<div style=3D"color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<hr style=3D"display:inline-block;width:98%">
<div id=3D"m_2832786293736650618divRplyFwdMsg" dir=3D"ltr"><font style=3D"f=
ont-size:11pt" face=3D"Calibri, sans-serif" color=3D"#000000"><b>From:</b> =
<a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com" target=3D"_blank">lojban@googleg=
roups.com</a> &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com" target=3D"_bla=
nk">lojban@googlegroups.com</a>&gt; on behalf of <a href=3D"mailto:gryphkat=
@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">gryphkat@gmail.com</a> &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:=
gryphkat@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">gryphkat@gmail.com</a>&gt;<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, 25 December 2017 2:55 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> lojban<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban</font>
<div>=C2=A0</div>
</div><div><div class=3D"h5">
<div class=3D"m_2832786293736650618BodyFragment"><font size=3D"2"><span sty=
le=3D"font-size:10pt">
<div class=3D"m_2832786293736650618PlainText">WOW! Timoteos states _exactly=
_ what I believe is the _best_ path for lojban,and quite clearly. I have sa=
id this before and hope it receives more positive attention this time becau=
se of the venue and clarity.<br>
<br>
This lack of backwards compatability I have run into sometimes, despite bei=
ng told that everyone would understand me, is one major reason I stopped wo=
rking on learning learning lojban about the time of the first schism.
<br>
<br>
.karis. <br>
<br>
-- <br>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;lojban&quot; group.<br>
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com" target=3D"=
_blank">lojban+unsubscribe@<wbr>googlegroups.com</a>.<br>
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.=
com" target=3D"_blank">lojban@googlegroups.com</a>.<br>
Visit this group at <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/group/lojban" targ=
et=3D"_blank">https://groups.google.com/<wbr>group/lojban</a>.<br>
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/optout" targ=
et=3D"_blank">https://groups.google.com/d/<wbr>optout</a>.<br>
</div>
</span></font></div>
</div></div></div>
</div>
</div><div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5">


<p></p>

-- <br>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;lojban&quot; group.<br>
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com" target=3D"_b=
lank">lojban+unsubscribe@<wbr>googlegroups.com</a>.<br>
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.=
com" target=3D"_blank">lojban@googlegroups.com</a>.<br>
Visit this group at <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/group/lojban" targ=
et=3D"_blank">https://groups.google.com/<wbr>group/lojban</a>.<br>
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/optout" targ=
et=3D"_blank">https://groups.google.com/d/<wbr>optout</a>.<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;lojban&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">lojban+unsub=
scribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.=
com">lojban@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/group/lojban">http=
s://groups.google.com/group/lojban</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/optout">http=
s://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.<br />

--089e08243688d214f00561735420--