Received: from mail-yb1-f190.google.com ([209.85.219.190]:33288) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jNdMA-0007ry-6y for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 07:13:08 -0700 Received: by mail-yb1-f190.google.com with SMTP id v46sf9091370ybi.0 for ; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 07:13:06 -0700 (PDT) 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=mZkyiUukEr5tKa73o1z6Ms2ZpNJKowtO4S3qxoNDqx4=; b=k3g4peQROPPVClxYQ94eqQ0oHPuDl0CAHcmqzl3AQnNR5y94q/0xLFLIIOrIWg+C9t qnxkoKsvD+FBZ0AEhpcpboWOGiGzRoD3Du6mdotBUTjj+T+AhdGjqHnWl3uErFAad9Mo 5vaDDACchO7bIUawD7llvEaer0QzjfyIWcHVz6fpHuZDvBsSsB2EMqi81Xc/f+LBNWnW iJhgPvf0dXY3jHO9limZhXsdbV74x8037ATJq/pmvuNpdDRGI1OTr0cyApxv52qxDyhB LJCxv2ovetABel9TTnrQvwbH0hZAbDeJLhTcbp9VI9CixjgTV/Ym1wP4dZNooXWDePUH /lMg== 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=mZkyiUukEr5tKa73o1z6Ms2ZpNJKowtO4S3qxoNDqx4=; b=Oe8yDENzwHWHD2Z0xc1URE6JVfUgiVCbAhHQM2AcwooxKfl4x6nEP11iSpTu/dceff jh4JINQRAIz4QwRX/HOhBOIAK+6CDWnvodg3cNxwf7AYGBw+/zrbzbBzvW4imwJNbPoy uX4vsHmRhV2qnG8RvsSgv0Jh+hcVO7hcSj+A6f3RzzBKuF4P37oNQ3HkFuX0M8uLdQDK JfRV0ZrIDvY5kYf97u9EiIsCaUvWIBpZYeVor03iHVX81huKacRx8F+c1doOT/jSjmih 4jPVjiKsmnYf89JEue7nFPo8XCU29+fV7gMZOlPGV6ip5GHlmLO7jjZOJOUQ3ulIsP17 cQDQ== 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=mZkyiUukEr5tKa73o1z6Ms2ZpNJKowtO4S3qxoNDqx4=; b=YuiFKODf9DK7yB7jVG7xVzi5kw7uiFhNZYRFtEkJHA1t7+/Io9JHe9ES+g9fBBJVV2 qt3JvqLyhtb3jM/2PQX7r/0ycHAmsmalI2EQ335zxrdkqJedtaYlfuRvm0HCXZ9+IUgX 6w2eRilykzdrEaPLhbFPNEwvQdGRS+Dzv2r6Um3HNGcwWQkwlfJorRmBkLjo2F1e+/vg JEmE/cpCBGniUFscZKBB+9NIN0e/qJkAFoYjAmHgBfcPBodP9uiB4uQbE0a9yTcujmPp DRAR4MwCqeGVi77xflkIVLetmH78DmfX2UztbmTHinr0WQ3CDkbyNv6sS8ijeXTK6clx hbhw== Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuaOWs8+BPBEXnB/Hw2bfMMLghyUw0SsdO35jFpUZ0nCY4BwEB6D OIbTTdbURmQGD7RXkzDd31M= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypKZsBQgN0ynfJw6Y9Dx5ZeF1PJTD3+BcY+UQDFV9uHat/5cMrCITN5jGgM6QX/4B3yXNW7kEA== X-Received: by 2002:a25:5588:: with SMTP id j130mr20110928ybb.179.1586700779951; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 07:12:59 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 2002:a5b:5cd:: with SMTP id w13ls7301257ybp.10.gmail; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 07:12:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a25:9705:: with SMTP id d5mr21293103ybo.449.1586700779048; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 07:12:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2020 07:12:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Gleki Arxokuna To: lojban Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <110320343.2935330.1586699696926@mail.yahoo.com> References: <18776223.2757089.1586622570213.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <18776223.2757089.1586622570213@mail.yahoo.com> <6fe62be6-21b6-40b7-98b6-0f4e0072df47@googlegroups.com> <8eb60e09-2aa3-4e14-b37e-f716ea06ecfe@googlegroups.com> <1137a1b7-cd6f-4c7c-b2cc-f38e8b4abb3f@googlegroups.com> <59cebb85-184c-49ed-9556-438ca75de05f@googlegroups.com> <110320343.2935330.1586699696926@mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [lojban] Why Lojban fails MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_Part_992_522456285.1586700778490" X-Original-Sender: gleki.is.my.name@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: -2.6 (--) X-Spam_score: -2.6 X-Spam_score_int: -25 X-Spam_bar: -- ------=_Part_992_522456285.1586700778490 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_993_659775857.1586700778491" ------=_Part_993_659775857.1586700778491 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Em domingo, 12 de abril de 2020 16:55:01 UTC+3, clifford escreveu: > > Oh, my! I merely meant to drop a friendly reminder that Lojban could not= =20 > achieve its goal as presently constituted. I learn (I=E2=80=99ve been aw= ay a=20 > while) Lojbanists (of some sort or other or maybe all) no longer car abou= t=20 > its primary goal, monoparsing, but are concerned to make a viable languag= e=20 > out of the scraps. =20 > Yeah I just reminded everyone who would be confused otherwise. "Lojban is= =20 done, no longer usable" this kind of thoughts you know. =20 > My immediate question is, =E2=80=9CGiven that Lojban no longer strives fo= r=20 > monparsing, what reason is there to continue working on it or learning it= ?=E2=80=9D > Well I wonder who is working in the direction of monoparsing at all? These= =20 numerous AI startups? =20 As for why learn Lojban. I guess as usual: dreams of a better spoken=20 language, spoken code, unambiguous language. In some sense Lojban is close= =20 to that. It has live support (newcomers get answers from humans), rich=20 history and is (I hope still) not under any JCB-like dictatorship=20 (Everlasting changes to the language). > In the past, all the grotesqueries of Lojban morphology and grammar coul= d=20 > be justified as necessary for the Great Goal. But now that that Goal is= =20 > gone, they merely constitute needless complexities that make learning the= =20 > language even harder. Stripping away the 47 kinds of commas (and God=20 > forbid you should use the wrong one, even though it no longer makes a=20 > crucial difference) (=E2=80=9947=E2=80=99 is merely a ridiculously large = number, not meant=20 > to be accurate) would make the language easier to learn and do that=20 > systematically for all the word classes would eventually get to something= =20 > manageable. But there would still be no reason to learn it, because it=20 > doesn=E2=80=99t do anything that English (etc.) doesn=E2=80=99t do, nor d= o it in a novel=20 > and revealing way. =20 > If I counted right, there are at least nine version of Lojban floating=20 > around with adherents. =20 > No. Many more. =20 Thehe winnowing process is presumably already at work and some of these are= =20 > close to languages of one grumpy guy in a garret. Some have people in LL= G=20 > offices (big whoop!). Some have decent sized (say 12) groups here and=20 > there.=20 > Hm, where? =20 > What can any of these offer to newbies or possible converts to get them t= o=20 > join? Nothing, really. So, they will all fade away (the LLG section=20 > running on on inertia). > Remember Loglan1 book that was creatively rewritten I to the CLL. More John Cowans can appear in future. I recommend that all of you take a weekend off and learn toki pona (maybe= =20 > start Friday night and leave a little time over breakfast on Monday). You= =20 > will have a new language with a purpose (you can choose from half a dozen= =20 > at least). And you don=E2=80=99t lose the rights to constantly snipe at = tiny=20 > infractions by your colinguals and to get into abstruse debate about=20 > details of grammar. After all, I am in the middle of it. =20 > Idk, in Facebook tokipona group there is some dude called Clifford that=20 every now and then posts philosophical discussions that are hard to grasp. =20 > > On Sunday, April 12, 2020, 06:02:08 AM CDT, Gleki Arxokuna < > gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote:=20 > > > > > Em domingo, 12 de abril de 2020 12:30:07 UTC+3, uakci escreveu: > > (snip) > > Lojban even if failed elsewhere shines here in it's stability. > > > Latin, too, is a stable language. But it's been long abandoned, for=20 > Romance languages had sprung about. The only reason some people learn Lat= in=20 > is for academic purposes, since it has a great share in the body of=20 > scientific works our world has produced. > > > Latin is a live language btw. > As the CLL puts it creation of new words is encouraged. > > > (see (1)) > > I feel no bloat in it at all but backward incompatibility as a drawback.= =20 > > > Languages change regardless of backward compatibility. No solution is=20 > truly future-proof; the only approach that guarantees success is to embra= ce=20 > change. Dismissing change on grounds of there being change in the first= =20 > place is, in my opinion, hilariously wrong =E2=80=94 then if you're so pa= ssionate=20 > about keeping the language in its current form, why not declare it to be = a=20 > success and, most importantly, move on to more important things in our=20 > lives? > > I don't consider any notion of "success" for Lojban as being important. N= o=20 > teleology sorry. > > > Then why are you engaging in a discussion about Lojban failing? If it=20 > doesn=E2=80=99t matter to you, then you might as well stop caring and, as= I=E2=80=99ve=20 > suggested before, move on. > > > I initially replied to pycyn. That whatever the goals were they are not= =20 > important. > So I'm engaging in it just to say that the topic is of little importance.= =20 > > > > > Isn't that=E2=80=A6 like=E2=80=A6 the opposite of what I want and the= exact statement=20 > of what you want? > > Sure. You are trying to change and change and change the language so that= =20 > new learners will never catch up=20 > > > (ad (1)) > > I see this as the manifestation of the ultimate hypocrisy. We are=20 > encouraged to create vocabulary, and vocabulary is a core part of the=20 > language, but no grammar proposals for you! I don=E2=80=99t understand wh= y you=20 > don=E2=80=99t have this visceral reaction of disgust when people add =E2= =80=98new and=20 > foreign=E2=80=99 zi=E2=80=99evla like {inde}, {mlauca}, {kaipti}, {uinmo}= =E2=80=94 yet, they too=20 > are something a learner will have to catch up with. > > > That's stability. Lojban is declared that way. New words are encouraged.= =20 > See the CLL. New learners will know that if they read the CLL. They will = be=20 > ready for it. > > Whatever you/I/other fluent or non fluent speakers decide to change in th= e=20 > CLL will only lead to the community dying out. > > I can see one important exception to it: mistypes in English text. I=20 > haven't witnessed any antagonism in fixing them. > > As for fixing internal contradictions or adding new parts of the language= =20 > as being official (sublanguages, dictionary, translations) that in fact= =20 > leads only to the feeling of "I will never make this". If Lojban were som= e=20 > programming framework supported by some la mikro softo company we could= =20 > ignore that and say: learn this ever-changing thing or leave it. > =20 > > However, any attempts to introduce changes to the language which simplify= =20 > it and remedy all the overengineering are always turned down by the=20 > =E2=80=98official=E2=80=99 language =E2=80=98lobby=E2=80=99. This causes = the language to drift away from=20 > what people actually use =E2=80=94 slowly but surely =E2=80=94 and I real= ly am sure that=20 > this will turn against you. > > > What I think is of little importance too. > I may speak xorlo or another crazy dialect. Thats my choice. New learners= =20 > have none. They must first reach fluency. > If existing fluent speakers don't stop tinkering seriously soon there wil= l=20 > be fewer and fewer new learners coming (some assert this is already=20 > happening). > > > > Here, let me try and make a point. Ever come upon The Glasgow Conversatio= n=20 > of 1995? One of the conversants happens to use a certain word that the=20 > other isn=E2=80=99t familiar with, and so the conversation devolves into = a=20 > mini-argument about those =E2=80=98bloody new cmavo=E2=80=99. (I don=E2= =80=99t suspect that they=20 > were totally serious with it, but that=E2=80=99s how it went in the end.)= This is a=20 > pinnacle of Lojban =E2=80=98cancel culture=E2=80=99, and do you know what= cmavo was the=20 > offender here? It=E2=80=99s {bu=E2=80=99u}. Now would you imagine that a = cmavo that=E2=80=99s used=20 > all the time nowadays had people against it when it was being first=20 > introduced? > > > That was before Lojban got into "release" state. But even from the CLL 1.= 0=20 > standpoint addition of some "su'oi" cmavo is okay, the CLL allows for tha= t.=20 > I would mildly argue that such additions make learning harder. I wouldn't= =20 > recommend adding such new words into tutorials. > > However, e.g. every 5 years some official organization could say " here i= s=20 > the new version of the language, instead of print "hello" you should now= =20 > say print("hello") ". This would obviously make the community lose those= =20 > who bought the previous edition of the Book but at the same time give som= e=20 > sense of bettering over time. But given that no such committee is going t= o=20 > appear anytime soon (lack of technical and organisational skills) this is= =20 > just my fantasy that can be safely ignored. Better to stick to the only= =20 > edition of the language. > > > Pretend English is our language of interest. Every time somebody says=20 > =E2=80=98there=E2=80=99s reasons=E2=80=99 instead of =E2=80=98there are r= easons=E2=80=99, as a fellow English=20 > speaker you MUST lash out at them and tell them they belong to the deepes= t=20 > strata of hell. In other words, if you have opinions about what the=20 > language should be like, you MUST make it clear that those are the correc= t=20 > ones. Good luck making friends with this sort of attitude. > > > English is not prescriptive. > =20 > > > Also, Dotside. > > All this is proof that over the entire history of language, people have= =20 > bitched, bitch, and will be bitching about how we ought to speak language= X=20 > (where X may be English or Lojban). But you pretend that there=E2=80=99s = no change=20 > and no change is needed and one can get by without any change at all. The= =20 > only future I foresee for you and the people who share your mindset is th= at=20 > you=E2=80=99ll stay where you are with your Lojban v1.0 Final Release whi= le others=20 > move on. I=E2=80=99ve already moved on, and so have the most prominent Lo= jbanists=20 > of the last decade. I=E2=80=99m pretty sure most of them still think of t= hemselves=20 > as Lojbanists; however, the toxic attitude that=E2=80=99s so prominent am= ong the=20 > members of the community ultimately makes them want to quit engaging in i= t,=20 > at least within the official venues like the IRC channel.=20 > > > That's fine. They can leave. Maybe Lojban has some inner hidden goal and= =20 > Lojban taught them something so that they don't need either the language = or=20 > the community anymore. > And that's great since without tinkering more space will be provided for= =20 > new learners to come. > =20 > > > I don=E2=80=99t know if I have much more to say. But most importantly, y= =E2=80=99all=E2=80=99s=20 > utter inability to =E2=80=98read the room=E2=80=99 and understand the nee= ds of those who=E2=80=99ve=20 > 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. > > I already had been pretty lifeless until recently, and that phase, I=20 > think, had managed to last for a couple years. =E2=80=98Impressive=E2=80= =99, huh? I see=20 > that it must be either dead air or vain debates (or rather: debacles) abo= ut=20 > what Lojban should and shouldn=E2=80=99t be.=20 > > Instead of just using it, as one does. > > =E2=80=94 Mi Hoashi j=C3=AD ka. > > --=20 > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups= =20 > "lojban" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an= =20 > email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit=20 > > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lojban/f1e41358-15f6-469a-9623-11725854= d112%40googlegroups.com=20 > > . > --=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/fb589019-279f-40e3-8314-c35b085f57ac%40googlegroups.com. ------=_Part_993_659775857.1586700778491 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Em domingo, 12 de abril de 2020 16:55:01 UTC+3, cl= ifford escreveu:
Oh, my! =C2=A0I merely meant to drop a friendly re= minder that Lojban could not achieve its goal as presently constituted. =C2= =A0I learn (I=E2=80=99ve been away a while) Lojbanists (of some sort or oth= er or maybe all) no longer car about its primary goal, monoparsing, but are= concerned to make a viable language out of the scraps. =C2=A0
<= /div>

Yeah I just reminded everyone who wou= ld be confused otherwise. "Lojban is done, no longer usable" this= kind of thoughts you know.
=C2=A0
My immediate question is= , =E2=80=9CGiven that Lojban no longer strives for monparsing, what reason = is there to continue working on it or learning it?=E2=80=9D

Well I wonder who is working in the dire= ction of monoparsing at all? These numerous AI startups?
=C2=A0

As for why learn Lojban. I guess as usual: dreams o= f a better spoken language, spoken code, unambiguous language. In some sens= e Lojban is close to that. It has live support (newcomers get answers from = humans), rich history and is (I hope still) not under any JCB-like dictator= ship (Everlasting changes to the language).
=C2=A0In the past, all t= he grotesqueries of Lojban morphology and grammar could be justified as nec= essary for the Great Goal. =C2=A0But now that that Goal is gone, they merel= y constitute needless complexities that make learning the language even har= der. =C2=A0Stripping away the 47 kinds of commas (and God forbid you should= use the wrong one, even though it no longer makes a crucial difference) (= =E2=80=9947=E2=80=99 is merely a ridiculously large number, not meant to be= accurate) would make the language easier to learn and do that systematical= ly for all the word classes would eventually get to something manageable. B= ut there would still be no reason to learn it, because it doesn=E2=80=99t d= o anything that English (etc.) doesn=E2=80=99t do, nor do it in a novel and= revealing way. =C2=A0
If I counted right, there are = at least nine version of Lojban floating around with adherents. =C2=A0

No. Many more.=C2=A0=C2=A0

Thehe winnowing process is presumably= already at work and some of these are close to languages of one grumpy guy= in a garret. =C2=A0Some have people in LLG offices (big whoop!). =C2=A0Som= e have decent sized (say 12) groups here and there.

Hm, where?
=C2=A0
=
What can any of these offer to newbies or possible converts to= get them to join? =C2=A0Nothing, really. =C2=A0So, they will all fade away= (the LLG section running on on inertia).

Remember Loglan1 book that was creatively rewritten= I to the CLL.
=C2=A0More John Cowans can appear in future.
=

I recommend that all of you ta= ke a weekend off and learn toki pona (maybe start Friday night and leave a = little time over breakfast on Monday). You will have a new language with a = purpose (you can choose from half a dozen at least). =C2=A0And you don=E2= =80=99t lose the rights to constantly snipe at tiny infractions by your col= inguals and to get into abstruse debate about details of grammar. =C2=A0Aft= er all, I am in the middle of it. =C2=A0

Idk, in Facebook tokipona group there is some dude called C= lifford that every now and then posts philosophical discussions that are ha= rd to grasp.
=C2=A0

=20
=20
On Sunday, April 12, 2020, 06:02:08 AM CDT, Gleki Arxok= una <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote:




Em domingo, 12 de abril de 2020 12:30:07 UTC+3, uakci escreveu:=
(snip)
=
Lojban even if failed elsewher= e shines here in it's stability.

Latin, too, is a stable language. But it's been long aba= ndoned, for Romance languages had sprung about. The only reason some people= learn Latin is for academic purposes, since it has a great share in the bo= dy of scientific works our world has produced.

Latin is a live language=C2=A0 btw.
As the CLL puts it creation of new words is encouraged.
=

(see (1))
<= /div>

I feel no bloat in it at all but backward incompatibility as a drawba= ck.=C2=A0

Langua= ges change regardless of backward compatibility. No solution is truly futur= e-proof; the only approach that guarantees success is to embrace change. Di= smissing change on grounds of there being change in the first place is, in = my opinion, hilariously wrong =E2=80=94 then if you're so passionate ab= out keeping the language in its current form, why not declare it to be a su= ccess and, most importantly, move on to more important things in our lives?=
I don't consider= any notion of "success" for Lojban as being important. No teleol= ogy sorry.

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, as = I=E2=80=99ve suggested before, move on.

I initially replied to pycyn. That whatever the goa= ls were they are not important.
So I'm engaging in it just to= say that the topic is of little importance.=C2=A0

> > Isn't that=E2=80=A6 = like=E2=80=A6 the opposite of what I want and the exact statement of what y= ou want?
Sure. You are trying to change= and change and change the language so that new learners will never catch u= p=C2=A0

(ad (1))

I see this as the manif= estation of the ultimate hypocrisy. We are encouraged to create vocabulary,= and vocabulary is a core part of the language, but no grammar proposals fo= r 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 catch up with.

That's stability. Lojban is declar= ed 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.

Whatever you/I/other fluent or non fluent speakers dec= ide to change in the CLL will only lead to the community dying out.

I can see one important exception to it: m= istypes in English text. I haven't witnessed any antagonism in fixing t= hem.

As for fixing internal contrad= ictions 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 some programming framework su= pported by some la mikro softo company we could ignore that and say: learn = this ever-changing thing or leave it.
=C2=A0
However, any attempts to introduce changes to the language wh= ich simplify it and remedy all the overengineering are always turned down b= y the =E2=80=98official=E2=80=99 language =E2=80=98lobby=E2=80=99. This cau= ses the language to drift away from what people actually use =E2=80=94 slow= ly but surely =E2=80=94 and I really am sure that this will turn against yo= u.

What I think = is of little importance too.
I may speak xorlo or another crazy d= ialect. Thats my choice. New learners have none. They must first reach flue= ncy.
If existing fluent speakers don't stop tinkering serious= ly soon there will be fewer and fewer new learners coming (some assert this= is already happening).



H= ere, let me try and make a point. Ever come upon The Glasgow Conversation o= f 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 s= uspect that they were totally serious with it, but that=E2=80=99s how it we= nt 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 imagine that a cmavo that=E2=80=99s used all the ti= me nowadays had people against it when it was being first introduced?
=

That was before Lojba= n got into "release" state. But even from the CLL 1.0 standpoint = addition of some "su'oi" cmavo is okay, the CLL allows for th= at. I would mildly argue that such additions make learning harder. I wouldn= 't recommend adding such new words into tutorials.

However, e.g. every 5 years some official organization= could say " here is the new version of the language, instead of print= "hello" you should now say print("hello") ". This= would obviously make the community lose=C2=A0 those who bought the previou= s edition of the Book but at the same time give some sense of bettering ove= r time. But given that no such committee is going to appear anytime soon (l= ack of technical and organisational skills) this is just my fantasy that ca= n be safely ignored. Better to stick to the only edition of the language.

Pretend Engli= sh 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 belo= ng to the deepest strata of hell. In other words, if you have opinions abou= t what the language should be like, you MUST make it clear that those are t= he correct ones. Good luck making friends with this sort of attitude.
=

English is not prescr= iptive.
=C2=A0

Also, Dotside.

All thi= s is proof that over the entire history of language, people have bitched, b= itch, and will be bitching about how we ought to speak language X (where X = may be English or Lojban). But you pretend that there=E2=80=99s no change a= nd no change is needed and one can get by without any change at all. The on= ly future I foresee for you and the people who share your mindset is that y= ou=E2=80=99ll stay where you are with your Lojban v1.0 Final Release while = others move on. I=E2=80=99ve already moved on, and so have the most promine= nt Lojbanists of the last decade. I=E2=80=99m pretty sure most of them stil= l 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 I= RC channel.=C2=A0

That's fine. They can leave. 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.
And that's= great since without tinkering more space will be provided for new learners= to come.
=C2=A0

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=98r= ead 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>

You put it right. I do= n't care of those who already learnt Lojban.

I already had been pretty life= less until recently, and that phase, I think, had managed to last for a cou= ple years. =E2=80=98Impressive=E2=80=99, huh? I see that it must be either = dead air or vain debates (or rather: debacles) about what Lojban should and= shouldn=E2=80=99t be.=C2=A0

Instea= d of just using it, as one does.

= =E2=80=94 Mi Hoashi j=C3=AD ka.
<= /div>

--
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 loj= ban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lojba= n/f1e41358-15f6-469a-9623-11725854d112%40googlegroups.com.

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lo= jban/fb589019-279f-40e3-8314-c35b085f57ac%40googlegroups.com.
------=_Part_993_659775857.1586700778491-- ------=_Part_992_522456285.1586700778490--