Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of ciuak.prog@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:4864:20::429 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::429;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <18776223.2757089.1586622570213.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
 <18776223.2757089.1586622570213@mail.yahoo.com> <c29378ec-fcee-40c8-8c42-b0a807d85ddf@googlegroups.com>
 <CACtk4+C8FqtmCh22YyPcRPiAecFLf8TuHkz8ru-JiHKbbjkceg@mail.gmail.com>
 <6fe62be6-21b6-40b7-98b6-0f4e0072df47@googlegroups.com> <CACtk4+BOX=1HLsDPpYnnF4F5udZYZW1L9n87bhWw6t4rwYzKhw@mail.gmail.com>
 <8eb60e09-2aa3-4e14-b37e-f716ea06ecfe@googlegroups.com> <CACtk4+CQVWmW8_=i-t4nT01vLg9QsXebhCYGip8NqkvyD6enhg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1137a1b7-cd6f-4c7c-b2cc-f38e8b4abb3f@googlegroups.com> <CACtk4+D0NF3ghV8wzD=oOv+ijrSiuNH3pgg5Ctn3JDMEO4nQxw@mail.gmail.com>
 <e00859fc-e0cf-44f2-9c1a-c6ae178f647e@googlegroups.com> <CACtk4+D7EusQg-W1=0d0919aGZgVKVO2043A4ogiostyWXM5fQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <59cebb85-184c-49ed-9556-438ca75de05f@googlegroups.com> <CACtk4+APMZbXATy1_xAUouvqxTiQr0sZ06x7XxmLJ-WBxVEWGQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <f1e41358-15f6-469a-9623-11725854d112@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <f1e41358-15f6-469a-9623-11725854d112@googlegroups.com>
From: uakci <ciuak.prog@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2020 16:07:13 +0200
Message-ID: <CACtk4+BAaZMF31=UFTNLHFNM94dshpvf1hZP9q2axn+wQznfNg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Why Lojban fails
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006fdd3d05a3187c24"
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: -2.1
X-Spam_score_int: -20
X-Spam_bar: --

--0000000000006fdd3d05a3187c24
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

niedz., 12 kwi 2020 o 13:02 Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
napisa=C5=82(a):

>
> Then why are you engaging in a discussion about Lojban failing? If it
>> doesn=E2=80=99t matter to you, then you might as well stop caring and, a=
s I=E2=80=99ve
>> suggested before, move on.
>>
>
> I initially replied to pycyn. That whatever the goals were they are not
> important.
> So I'm engaging in it just to say that the topic is of little importance.
>

Sounds oxymoronic to me.


> I see this as the manifestation of the ultimate hypocrisy. We are
>> encouraged to create vocabulary, and vocabulary is a core part of the
>> language, but no grammar proposals for you! I don=E2=80=99t understand w=
hy you
>> don=E2=80=99t have this visceral reaction of disgust when people add =E2=
=80=98new and
>> foreign=E2=80=99 zi=E2=80=99evla like {inde}, {mlauca}, {kaipti}, {uinmo=
} =E2=80=94 yet, they too
>> are something a learner will have to catch up with.
>>
>
> That's stability. Lojban is declared that way. New words are encouraged.
> See the CLL. New learners will know that if they read the CLL. They will =
be
> ready for it.
>

They will also be ready for the inevitable, which is that there are
commonly used grammatical structures which the CLL wilfully omits.


> Whatever you/I/other fluent or non fluent speakers decide to change in th=
e
> CLL will only lead to the community dying out.
>

*Your* community.

And it's time I made a small correction. It's been a great mistake to call
you a community. Communities stick together, but this make-pretend
community is entrenched in disputes. The departure of a great member of a
community typically comes off as worthy of grievance, but this community
has seen giants go. Communities aren't the sort of places that come and go;
you come and stay. Communities are something people contribute to through
willpower and effort and their precious man-hours (and woman-hours too),
but the only experience I've seen radiate from those who've tried and
failed to incorporate themselves in the Lojbanic 'community' is one that's
based on full-on unreciprocation. In a well-functioning community, people
leave when they think they've done their dues; in a pathological community
like this one, people leave because there's so much work to do that they're
barred from doing.


> I can see one important exception to it: mistypes in English text. I
> haven't witnessed any antagonism in fixing them.
>

Sure, spend effort on what matters least. Just to keep the *air* of
business.


> As for fixing internal contradictions or adding new parts of the language
> as being official (sublanguages, dictionary, translations) that in fact
> leads only to the feeling of "I will never make this". If Lojban were som=
e
> programming framework supported by some la mikro softo company we could
> ignore that and say: learn this ever-changing thing or leave it.
>

So you've jumped on the programming language train=E2=80=A6 oh boy do I hav=
e a lot
to say in this matter.

Programming languages do improve. Java =E2=80=94 a language that's close to=
 relic
status =E2=80=94 has recently seen additions like lambdas, closures, anonym=
ous
classes=E2=80=A6 Every programming language which does not wish to be yanke=
d off
the mainstream train of thought tries its best to include the essential
parts of what people want or need or can find in other places. We don't
need to force people to use Functional Programming concepts, but we might
as well leave those parts in so the ones who want it can have it and be
happy.

Have you ever heard about Elm? It, too, is governed by a man who believes
he can exercise absolute power. He, too, says things like =E2=80=98if you d=
on't do
X the Y way, then why are you using our product?=E2=80=99. All in the name =
of
=E2=80=98being opinionated=E2=80=99. But we can be opinionated and permissi=
ve; we can
foster diversity while maintaining a strong baseline; we can be descriptive
without going all out. It can all be done, and the way strong Open Source
projects are led can tell us a lot about what we're doing wrong. I predict
that Elm is going to get forked away from very soon; Lojban, with its
despotic attitude and little room for variation, is going to be moved away
from. It's happening, and once it's reached full impetus, you won't be able
to stop it.


>
>
>> However, any attempts to introduce changes to the language which simplif=
y
>> it and remedy all the overengineering are always turned down by the
>> =E2=80=98official=E2=80=99 language =E2=80=98lobby=E2=80=99. This causes=
 the language to drift away from
>> what people actually use =E2=80=94 slowly but surely =E2=80=94 and I rea=
lly am sure that
>> this will turn against you.
>>
>
> What I think is of little importance too.
>

You say that, but you're very strong in asserting your opinions. If you
think you should bow to the Founding Fathers of the language and to the
demigods which preside in the committee (whatever its form of presentation
is), then you're doing this in vain. Language is to free thought, not
enslave it.


> I may speak xorlo or another crazy dialect. Thats my choice. New learners
> have none. They must first reach fluency.
>

I don't have a problem with treating CLL Lojban as =E2=80=98baseline=E2=80=
=99 Lojban. In
fact, I wrote a little essay on the matter around two years ago [1], and
although it's hard for me to gauge the reactions, I can tell you that
calling the =E2=80=98official dialect=E2=80=99 the =E2=80=98base(line) dial=
ect=E2=80=99 doesn't do said
dialect any harm =E2=80=94 quite the opposite: it empowers people who want =
to
experiment to experiment, and gives this base dialect an incentive to
develop =E2=80=94 slowly and rationally.


> If existing fluent speakers don't stop tinkering seriously soon there wil=
l
> be fewer and fewer new learners coming (some assert this is already
> happening).
>

See above. And the =E2=80=98tinkerers=E2=80=99 (as you've taken to calling =
them) aren't at
fault; you're just getting a taste of your own medicine.


> Here, let me try and make a point. Ever come upon The Glasgow Conversatio=
n
>> of 1995? One of the conversants happens to use a certain word that the
>> other isn=E2=80=99t familiar with, and so the conversation devolves into=
 a
>> mini-argument about those =E2=80=98bloody new cmavo=E2=80=99. (I don=E2=
=80=99t suspect that they
>> were totally serious with it, but that=E2=80=99s how it went in the end.=
) This is a
>> pinnacle of Lojban =E2=80=98cancel culture=E2=80=99, and do you know wha=
t cmavo was the
>> offender here? It=E2=80=99s {bu=E2=80=99u}. Now would you imagine that a=
 cmavo that=E2=80=99s used
>> all the time nowadays had people against it when it was being first
>> introduced?
>>
>
> That was before Lojban got into "release" state. But even from the CLL 1.=
0
> standpoint addition of some "su'oi" cmavo is okay, the CLL allows for tha=
t.
> I would mildly argue that such additions make learning harder. I wouldn't
> recommend adding such new words into tutorials.
>

You know what makes learning harder? Tons upon tons of cmavo which nobody
really uses and which could be phrased in simpler terms. Irregularities in
gismu frames. Many, many internal distinctions like PU vs. VI vs. ZI vs.
ZEhA vs. FAhA vs. BAI. And if your point is that the CLL is a definitive
source of knowledge about what Lojban 1.0 the forever version should look
like, then what about xorlo? This starts to feel like I'm trying to
persuade a biblical absolutism into rejecting the absoluteness of the
Bible. And if that's the case, the best approach is to walk away and leave
them be; many people have done that so far. It's a telling sign.


> However, e.g. every 5 years some official organization could say " here i=
s
> the new version of the language, instead of print "hello" you should now
> say print("hello") ". This would obviously make the community lose  those
> who bought the previous edition of the Book but at the same time give som=
e
> sense of bettering over time. But given that no such committee is going t=
o
> appear anytime soon (lack of technical and organisational skills) this is
> just my fantasy that can be safely ignored. Better to stick to the only
> edition of the language.
>

Python 3 was released in 2008, and the official deprecation date for Python
2 was announced to be 2020. Do you really think that 12 years isn't enough
to hop over?

You're making a moot point: in Python 3, `print` is made into a regular
function; previously, it was a keyword. This reduces complexity, which is
good =E2=80=94 it regularizes the treatment of `print` (what's so special a=
bout it?
why can't my procedure be made into a keyword?). The Python community has
encouraged switching over to v3 for a long time, yielding such tools as
2to3.

All this shows that change can be allowed, even if you prefer to keep it
slow. Today's language leaders' standpoint is not to attempt any change,
even as it wheezes past them.


> Pretend English is our language of interest. Every time somebody says
>> =E2=80=98there=E2=80=99s reasons=E2=80=99 instead of =E2=80=98there are =
reasons=E2=80=99, as a fellow English
>> speaker you MUST lash out at them and tell them they belong to the deepe=
st
>> strata of hell. In other words, if you have opinions about what the
>> language should be like, you MUST make it clear that those are the corre=
ct
>> ones. Good luck making friends with this sort of attitude.
>>
>
> English is not prescriptive.
>

Languages themselves can't be descriptive or prescriptive; people and
organizations and dictionaries are. For example, Polish is overseen by the
RJP (the Polish Language Council), Finnish =E2=80=94 by KOTUS (Institute fo=
r the
Languages of Finland), and so on. But they're not to serve themselves, but
the people which actually use the languages. If a change becomes
mainstream, the RJP will vote itself over to its side.

It's important to remember that institutions like the LLG are not allowed
to patronize us or to tell us that =E2=80=98this is how we do things becaus=
e it's
how we do them=E2=80=99. It's the people who have the right to choose =E2=
=80=94 many have
chosen against the absolutist bullshit. And that's why your community
shrinks day by day.


> All this is proof that over the entire history of language, people have
>> bitched, bitch, and will be bitching about how we ought to speak languag=
e X
>> (where X may be English or Lojban). But you pretend that there=E2=80=99s=
 no change
>> and no change is needed and one can get by without any change at all. Th=
e
>> only future I foresee for you and the people who share your mindset is t=
hat
>> you=E2=80=99ll stay where you are with your Lojban v1.0 Final Release wh=
ile others
>> move on. I=E2=80=99ve already moved on, and so have the most prominent L=
ojbanists
>> of the last decade. I=E2=80=99m pretty sure most of them still think of =
themselves
>> as Lojbanists; however, the toxic attitude that=E2=80=99s so prominent a=
mong the
>> members of the community ultimately makes them want to quit engaging in =
it,
>> at least within the official venues like the IRC channel.
>>
>
> That's fine. They can leave.
>

You don't have the right to control who's around. Definitely not if they're
not misbehaving. So far, the reasons for leaving the Lojban community have
been weariness and helplessness. And you can't expect to deserve to be
treated with due respect if people are ostracized and stigmatized.


> Maybe Lojban has some inner hidden goal and Lojban taught them something
> so that they don't need either the language or the community anymore.
>

They don't need the bullcrap that surrounds both. That's what it is. Many
such people make these decisions against what their hearts tell them, but
sanity is more important than appeasement.


> And that's great since without tinkering more space will be provided for
> new learners to come.
>

There is space; there's little incentive. The halls have been decked with
spikes.


> I don=E2=80=99t know if I have much more to say. But most importantly, y=
=E2=80=99all=E2=80=99s
>> utter inability to =E2=80=98read the room=E2=80=99 and understand the ne=
eds of those who=E2=80=99ve
>> had the largest impact on the community will eventually make it run dry.
>>
>
> You put it right. I don't care of those who already learnt Lojban.
>

Dismissal is not the right path to take. As I said above, this *will* turn
against you. The people united will never be defeated.

~ ~ ~

Perhaps it's time to do the right thing =E2=80=94 fork. Somebody (maybe me =
myself,
who knows) should do God's work and rethink the grammar, rethink the vocab,
rethink the approach. Because if you stick to being stuck and you're stuck
in being stuck, then the people watching who have enough integrity to step
back and distance themselves a little so they're not dragged into the pit
will leave you be. And that's what you want =E2=80=94 to be left alone. But=
 a
committee doesn't exist with a community, and since the community has
pretty much dispersed, the committee has failed to serve it.

I'm not going to drag this pointless rowing about for any longer; it's
Easter and I'm supposed to rejoice with my family. All I can say is: if you
are sure you know what you're doing and you're so adamant to keep at it,
then power to you. However, it's you who'll face the consequences, and
hurting others is one such consequence.

=E2=80=94 M=E1=BB=89 H=E1=BB=8Fash=C4=AB j=C3=AD ka.

--=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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/=
lojban/CACtk4%2BBAaZMF31%3DUFTNLHFNM94dshpvf1hZP9q2axn%2BwQznfNg%40mail.gma=
il.com.

--0000000000006fdd3d05a3187c24
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">=
<div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">niedz., 12 kwi 2020 o 13:02=C2=A0Glek=
i Arxokuna &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com">gleki.is.my.na=
me@gmail.com</a>&gt; napisa=C5=82(a):<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_q=
uote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,2=
04);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote=
" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);=
padding-left:1ex"><div><div dir=3D"auto">Then why are you engaging in a dis=
cussion about Lojban failing? If it doesn=E2=80=99t matter to you, then you=
 might as well stop caring and, as I=E2=80=99ve suggested before, move on.<=
/div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I initially replied to pycyn. T=
hat whatever the goals were they are not important.</div><div>So I&#39;m en=
gaging in it just to say that the topic is of little importance.=C2=A0</div=
></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Sounds oxymoronic to me.<br></div><=
div>=C2=A0<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0=
px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div =
dir=3D"ltr"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0=
.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><div dir=
=3D"auto">I see this as the manifestation of the ultimate hypocrisy. We are=
 encouraged to create vocabulary, and vocabulary is a core part of the lang=
uage, but no grammar proposals for you! I don=E2=80=99t understand why you =
don=E2=80=99t have this visceral reaction of disgust when people add =E2=80=
=98new and foreign=E2=80=99 zi=E2=80=99evla like {inde}, {mlauca}, {kaipti}=
, {uinmo} =E2=80=94 yet, they too are something a learner will have to catc=
h up with.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>That&#39;s stability=
. Lojban is declared that way. New words are encouraged. See the CLL. New l=
earners will know that if they read the CLL. They will be ready for it.</di=
v></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>They will also be ready for the in=
evitable, which is that there are commonly used grammatical structures whic=
h the CLL wilfully omits.<br></div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gm=
ail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,=
204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Whatever you/I/other fluen=
t or non fluent speakers decide to change in the CLL will only lead to the =
community dying out.</div></div></blockquote><div>=C2=A0</div><div>*Your* c=
ommunity.</div><div><br></div><div>And it&#39;s time I made a small correct=
ion. It&#39;s been a great mistake to call you a community. Communities sti=
ck together, but this make-pretend community is entrenched in disputes. The=
 departure of a great member of a community typically comes off as worthy o=
f grievance, but this community has seen giants go. Communities aren&#39;t =
the sort of places that come and go; you come and stay. Communities are som=
ething people contribute to through willpower and effort and their precious=
 man-hours (and woman-hours too), but the only experience I&#39;ve seen rad=
iate from those who&#39;ve tried and failed to incorporate themselves in th=
e Lojbanic &#39;community&#39; is one that&#39;s based on full-on unrecipro=
cation. In a well-functioning community, people leave when they think they&=
#39;ve done their dues; in a pathological community like this one, people l=
eave because there&#39;s so much work to do that they&#39;re barred from do=
ing.<br></div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"m=
argin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left=
:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>I can see one important exception to it: mistyp=
es in English text. I haven&#39;t witnessed any antagonism in fixing them.<=
/div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Sure, spend effort on what matt=
ers least. Just to keep the *air* of business.<br></div><div>=C2=A0</div><b=
lockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-le=
ft:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>As fo=
r fixing internal contradictions or adding new parts of the language as bei=
ng official (sublanguages, dictionary, translations) that in fact leads onl=
y to the feeling of &quot;I will never make this&quot;. If Lojban were some=
 programming framework supported by some la mikro softo company we could ig=
nore that and say: learn this ever-changing thing or leave it.</div></div><=
/blockquote><div><br></div><div>So you&#39;ve jumped on the programming lan=
guage train=E2=80=A6 oh boy do I have a lot to say in this matter.</div><di=
v><br></div><div>Programming languages do improve. Java =E2=80=94 a languag=
e that&#39;s close to relic status =E2=80=94 has recently seen additions li=
ke lambdas, closures, anonymous classes=E2=80=A6 Every programming language=
 which does not wish to be yanked off the mainstream train of thought tries=
 its best to include the essential parts of what people want or need or can=
 find in other places. We don&#39;t need to force people to use Functional =
Programming concepts, but we might as well leave those parts in so the ones=
 who want it can have it and be happy.</div><div><br></div><div>Have you ev=
er heard about Elm? It, too, is governed by a man who believes he can exerc=
ise absolute power. He, too, says things like =E2=80=98if you don&#39;t do =
X the Y way, then why are you using our product?=E2=80=99. All in the name =
of =E2=80=98being opinionated=E2=80=99. But we can be opinionated and permi=
ssive; we can foster diversity while maintaining a strong baseline; we can =
be descriptive without going all out. It can all be done, and the way stron=
g Open Source projects are led can tell us a lot about what we&#39;re doing=
 wrong. I predict that Elm is going to get forked away from very soon; Lojb=
an, with its despotic attitude and little room for variation, is going to b=
e moved away from. It&#39;s happening, and once it&#39;s reached full impet=
us, you won&#39;t be able to stop it.<br></div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote=
 class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px so=
lid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>=C2=A0</div><b=
lockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-le=
ft:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><div dir=3D"auto"> How=
ever, any attempts to introduce changes to the language which simplify it a=
nd remedy all the overengineering are always turned down by the =E2=80=98of=
ficial=E2=80=99 language =E2=80=98lobby=E2=80=99. This causes the language =
to drift away from what people actually use =E2=80=94 slowly but surely =E2=
=80=94 and I really am sure that this will turn against you.</div></div></b=
lockquote><div><br></div><div>What I think is of little importance too.</di=
v></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>You say that, but you&#39;re very =
strong in asserting your opinions. If you think you should bow to the Found=
ing Fathers of the language and to the demigods which preside in the commit=
tee (whatever its form of presentation is), then you&#39;re doing this in v=
ain. Language is to free thought, not enslave it.<br></div><div>=C2=A0</div=
><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border=
-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>I =
may speak xorlo or another crazy dialect. Thats my choice. New learners hav=
e none. They must first reach fluency.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></d=
iv><div>I don&#39;t have a problem with treating CLL Lojban as =E2=80=98bas=
eline=E2=80=99 Lojban. In fact, I wrote a little essay on the matter around=
 two years ago [1], and although it&#39;s hard for me to gauge the reaction=
s, I can tell you that calling the =E2=80=98official dialect=E2=80=99 the =
=E2=80=98base(line) dialect=E2=80=99 doesn&#39;t do said dialect any harm =
=E2=80=94 quite the opposite: it empowers people who want to experiment to =
experiment, and gives this base dialect an incentive to develop =E2=80=94 s=
lowly and rationally.<br></div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_=
quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,=
204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>If existing fluent speakers do=
n&#39;t stop tinkering seriously soon there will be fewer and fewer new lea=
rners coming (some assert this is already happening).</div></div></blockquo=
te><div><br></div><div>See above. And the =E2=80=98tinkerers=E2=80=99 (as y=
ou&#39;ve taken to calling them) aren&#39;t at fault; you&#39;re just getti=
ng a taste of your own medicine.<br></div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote clas=
s=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid r=
gb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><blockquote class=3D"gma=
il_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,2=
04,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><div dir=3D"auto">Here, let me try and make =
a point. Ever come upon The Glasgow Conversation of 1995? One of the conver=
sants happens to use a certain word that the other isn=E2=80=99t familiar w=
ith, and so the conversation devolves into a mini-argument about those =E2=
=80=98bloody new cmavo=E2=80=99. (I don=E2=80=99t suspect that they were to=
tally serious with it, but that=E2=80=99s how it went in the end.) This is =
a pinnacle of Lojban =E2=80=98cancel culture=E2=80=99, and do you know what=
 cmavo was the offender here? It=E2=80=99s {bu=E2=80=99u}. Now would you im=
agine that a cmavo that=E2=80=99s used all the time nowadays had people aga=
inst it when it was being first introduced?</div></div></blockquote><div><b=
r></div><div>That was before Lojban got into &quot;release&quot; state. But=
 even from the CLL 1.0 standpoint addition of some &quot;su&#39;oi&quot; cm=
avo is okay, the CLL allows for that. I would mildly argue that such additi=
ons make learning harder. I wouldn&#39;t recommend adding such new words in=
to tutorials.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>You know what mak=
es learning harder? Tons upon tons of cmavo which nobody really uses and wh=
ich could be phrased in simpler terms. Irregularities in gismu frames. Many=
, many internal distinctions like PU vs. VI vs. ZI vs. ZEhA vs. FAhA vs. BA=
I. And if your point is that the CLL is a definitive source of knowledge ab=
out what Lojban 1.0 the forever version should look like, then what about x=
orlo? This starts to feel like I&#39;m trying to persuade a biblical absolu=
tism into rejecting the absoluteness of the Bible. And if that&#39;s the ca=
se, the best approach is to walk away and leave them be; many people have d=
one that so far. It&#39;s a telling sign.<br></div><div><br></div><blockquo=
te class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px =
solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><br></div><d=
iv>However, e.g. every 5 years some official organization could say &quot; =
here is the new version of the language, instead of print &quot;hello&quot;=
 you should now say print(&quot;hello&quot;) &quot;. This would obviously m=
ake the community lose=C2=A0 those who bought the previous edition of the B=
ook but at the same time give some sense of bettering over time. But given =
that no such committee is going to appear anytime soon (lack of technical a=
nd organisational skills) this is just my fantasy that can be safely ignore=
d. Better to stick to the only edition of the language.</div></div></blockq=
uote><div><br></div><div>Python 3 was released in 2008, and the official de=
precation date for Python 2 was announced to be 2020. Do you really think t=
hat 12 years isn&#39;t enough to hop over?</div><div><br></div><div>You&#39=
;re making a moot point: in Python 3, `print` is made into a regular functi=
on; previously, it was a keyword. This reduces complexity, which is good =
=E2=80=94 it regularizes the treatment of `print` (what&#39;s so special ab=
out it? why can&#39;t my procedure be made into a keyword?). The Python com=
munity has encouraged switching over to v3 for a long time, yielding such t=
ools as 2to3.</div><div><br></div><div>All this shows that change can be al=
lowed, even if you prefer to keep it slow. Today&#39;s language leaders&#39=
; standpoint is not to attempt any change, even as it wheezes past them.<br=
></div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0=
px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><=
div dir=3D"ltr"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0=
px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><div=
 dir=3D"auto">Pretend English is our language of interest. Every time someb=
ody says =E2=80=98there=E2=80=99s reasons=E2=80=99 instead of =E2=80=98ther=
e are reasons=E2=80=99, as a fellow English speaker you MUST lash out at th=
em and tell them they belong to the deepest strata of hell. In other words,=
 if you have opinions about what the language should be like, you MUST make=
 it clear that those are the correct ones. Good luck making friends with th=
is sort of attitude.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>English is=
 not prescriptive.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Languages th=
emselves can&#39;t be descriptive or prescriptive; people and organizations=
 and dictionaries are. For example, Polish is overseen by the RJP (the Poli=
sh Language Council), Finnish =E2=80=94 by KOTUS (Institute for the Languag=
es of Finland), and so on. But they&#39;re not to serve themselves, but the=
 people which actually use the languages. If a change becomes mainstream, t=
he RJP will vote itself over to its side.</div><div><br></div><div>It&#39;s=
 important to remember that institutions like the LLG are not allowed to pa=
tronize us or to tell us that =E2=80=98this is how we do things because it&=
#39;s how we do them=E2=80=99. It&#39;s the people who have the right to ch=
oose =E2=80=94 many have chosen against the absolutist bullshit. And that&#=
39;s why your community shrinks day by day.<br></div><div>=C2=A0</div><bloc=
kquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:=
1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><blockquote c=
lass=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px soli=
d rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><div dir=3D"auto">All this is pro=
of that over the entire history of language, people have bitched, bitch, an=
d will be bitching about how we ought to speak language X (where X may be E=
nglish or Lojban). But you pretend that there=E2=80=99s no change and no ch=
ange is needed and one can get by without any change at all. The only futur=
e I foresee for you and the people who share your mindset is that you=E2=80=
=99ll stay where you are with your Lojban v1.0 Final Release while others m=
ove on. I=E2=80=99ve already moved on, and so have the most prominent Lojba=
nists of the last decade. I=E2=80=99m pretty sure most of them still think =
of themselves as Lojbanists; however, the toxic attitude that=E2=80=99s so =
prominent among the members of the community ultimately makes them want to =
quit engaging in it, at least within the official venues like the IRC chann=
el.=C2=A0<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>That&#39;s fine. =
They can leave.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>You don&#39;t h=
ave the right to control who&#39;s around. Definitely not if they&#39;re no=
t misbehaving. So far, the reasons for leaving the Lojban community have be=
en weariness and helplessness. And you can&#39;t expect to deserve to be tr=
eated with due respect if people are ostracized and stigmatized.<br></div><=
div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0=
px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=
=3D"ltr"><div>Maybe Lojban has some inner hidden goal and Lojban taught the=
m something so that they don&#39;t need either the language or the communit=
y anymore.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>They don&#39;t need =
the bullcrap that surrounds both. That&#39;s what it is. Many such people m=
ake these decisions against what their hearts tell them, but sanity is more=
 important than appeasement.<br></div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D=
"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(2=
04,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>And that&#39;s great si=
nce without tinkering more space will be provided for new learners to come.=
</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>There is space; there&#39;s li=
ttle incentive. The halls have been decked with spikes.<br></div><div>=C2=
=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8e=
x;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"=
><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border=
-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><div dir=3D"auto">I=
 don=E2=80=99t know if I have much more to say. But most importantly, y=E2=
=80=99all=E2=80=99s utter inability to =E2=80=98read the room=E2=80=99 and =
understand the needs of those who=E2=80=99ve had the largest impact on the =
community will eventually make it run dry.</div></div></blockquote><div><br=
></div><div>You put it right. I don&#39;t care of those who already learnt =
Lojban.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Dismissal is not the ri=
ght path to take. As I said above, this *will* turn against you. The people=
 united will never be defeated.</div><div><br></div><div>~ ~ ~<br></div><di=
v><br></div><div>Perhaps it&#39;s time to do the right thing =E2=80=94 fork=
. Somebody (maybe me myself, who knows) should do God&#39;s work and rethin=
k the grammar, rethink the vocab, rethink the approach. Because if you stic=
k to being stuck and you&#39;re stuck in being stuck, then the people watch=
ing who have enough integrity to step back and distance themselves a little=
 so they&#39;re not dragged into the pit will leave you be. And that&#39;s =
what you want =E2=80=94 to be left alone. But a committee doesn&#39;t exist=
 with a community, and since the community has pretty much dispersed, the c=
ommittee has failed to serve it.</div><div><br></div><div>I&#39;m not going=
 to drag this pointless rowing about for any longer; it&#39;s Easter and I&=
#39;m supposed to rejoice with my family. All I can say is: if you are sure=
 you know what you&#39;re doing and you&#39;re so adamant to keep at it, th=
en power to you. However, it&#39;s you who&#39;ll face the consequences, an=
d hurting others is one such consequence.</div><div><br></div><div>=E2=80=
=94 M=E1=BB=89 H=E1=BB=8Fash=C4=AB j=C3=AD ka.<br></div></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 view this discussion on the web visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.c=
om/d/msgid/lojban/CACtk4%2BBAaZMF31%3DUFTNLHFNM94dshpvf1hZP9q2axn%2BwQznfNg=
%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=3Demail&utm_source=3Dfooter">https://groups.go=
ogle.com/d/msgid/lojban/CACtk4%2BBAaZMF31%3DUFTNLHFNM94dshpvf1hZP9q2axn%2Bw=
QznfNg%40mail.gmail.com</a>.<br />

--0000000000006fdd3d05a3187c24--