Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 01:51:13 -0800 (PST)
From: sukender1@gmail.com
To: lojban <lojban@googlegroups.com>
Message-Id: <812dfca3-bc7f-40a5-bcb0-8e1a7062e52f@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKOEKkSo31SPvzwtfDqwpmQyJAx8J+yoS933R3+szxBLoSqzRg@mail.gmail.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>
 <CAHiXx=OOb=3R1V9kL0+1HfWzqgUgaQhWRhe_h7uH7=7nfQvYZg@mail.gmail.com> <SY3PR01MB0873024206868E1EBE7AA82DEB050@SY3PR01MB0873.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAKOEKkSo31SPvzwtfDqwpmQyJAx8J+yoS933R3+szxBLoSqzRg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; 
	boundary="----=_Part_13997_1216710782.1515405074004"
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: -1.3
X-Spam_score_int: -12
X-Spam_bar: -

------=_Part_13997_1216710782.1515405074004
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_13998_218059112.1515405074005"

------=_Part_13998_218059112.1515405074005
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

IMHO, the 'A' and 'B' groups are not 100% mutually exclusive, and the 
frontier between the two is fuzzy. This is why it is so hard to tell if 
"rule XYZ" should belong to "standard/CLL/whatever Lojban", or be a fork.

Still IMHO, I may recap a few pros/cons:

   - Looking forward for improvements may:
      - ... be a never ending task and create new forks "forever". It may 
      be thus considered as an experiment (or a group of experiments), not a 
      "spokable" language.
      - ... make people drop learning it, as no one could ever learn it in 
      an "almost stable" way.
      - ... split the community, thus lowering the interest for the 
      experiment/language.
   - Keeping backward compatibility may:
      - ... prevent from fixing unforeseen issues.
      - ... also make people drop learning it, as some (potentially 
      important) flaws would not be fixed.
   
So what? As I previously said, it seems quite obvious that neither extreme 
choice is possible. I'm closer than A (backward-compatibility / CLL, 
as gejyspa and Thimothy) than B. But I just can't believe no breaking 
changes will happen. As far as I know, even the widely-accepted "xorlo" is 
somewhat breaking, as it redefines a few things. I guess we might find a 
"90% A, 10% B"-kind of profile. But that will not be up to me to decide! 
Actually I think that no one could impose his/her point of view to others, 
despite great efforts and involvement of some.

Furthermore (and still as previously stated), the most important thing is 
that we need to make the number of Lojbanists *increase*, and to avoid 
splitting/schisms that would blast off the efforts of all.

Therefore, we need *consensus*. This is why I'm still putting efforts on 
the "submission platform" I told before. It takes much more time than 
expected (I naively thought I could find out-the-box modules for my 
usage...), unfortunately. But I'm still on it.

My 2 cents...

la .sykyndyr.

-- 
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_13998_218059112.1515405074005
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>IMHO, the &#39;A&#39; and &#39;B&#39; groups are not =
100% mutually exclusive, and the frontier between the two is fuzzy. This is=
 why it is so hard to tell if &quot;rule XYZ&quot; should belong to &quot;s=
tandard/CLL/whatever Lojban&quot;, or be a fork.</div><div><br></div><div>S=
till IMHO, I may recap a few pros/cons:</div><div><ul><li>Looking forward f=
or improvements may:</li><ul><li>... be a never ending task and create new =
forks &quot;forever&quot;. It may be thus considered as an experiment (or a=
 group of experiments), not a &quot;spokable&quot; language.</li><li>... ma=
ke people drop learning it, as no one could ever learn it in an &quot;almos=
t stable&quot; way.</li><li>... split the community, thus lowering the inte=
rest for the experiment/language.</li></ul><li>Keeping backward compatibili=
ty may:</li><ul><li>... prevent from fixing unforeseen issues.</li><li>... =
also make people drop learning it, as some (potentially important) flaws wo=
uld not be fixed.</li></ul></ul></div><div>So what? As I previously said, i=
t seems quite obvious that neither extreme choice is possible. I&#39;m=C2=
=A0closer than A (backward-compatibility / CLL, as=C2=A0gejyspa and Thimoth=
y) than B. But I just can&#39;t believe no breaking changes will happen. As=
 far as I know, even the widely-accepted &quot;xorlo&quot; is somewhat brea=
king, as it redefines a few things. I guess we might find a &quot;90% A, 10=
% B&quot;-kind of profile. But that will not be up to me to decide! Actuall=
y I think that no one could impose his/her point of view to others, despite=
 great efforts and involvement of some.</div><div><br></div><div>Furthermor=
e=C2=A0(and still as previously stated), the most important thing is that w=
e need to make the number of Lojbanists <b>increase</b>, and to avoid split=
ting/schisms that would blast off the efforts of all.</div><div><br></div><=
div>Therefore, we need <b>consensus</b>. This is why I&#39;m still putting =
efforts on the &quot;submission platform&quot; I told before. It takes much=
 more time than expected (I naively thought I could find out-the-box module=
s for my usage...), unfortunately. But I&#39;m still on it.</div><div><br><=
/div><div>My 2 cents...</div><div><br></div><div>la .sykyndyr.</div><div><b=
r></div></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 />

------=_Part_13998_218059112.1515405074005--

------=_Part_13997_1216710782.1515405074004--