From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Fri Oct 11 16:16:02 2002 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 11 Oct 2002 16:16:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailbox-5.st1.spray.net ([212.78.202.105]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18090h-0003TC-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 11 Oct 2002 16:15:59 -0700 Received: from oemcomputer (host213-121-66-46.surfport24.v21.co.uk [213.121.66.46]) by mailbox-5.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A970F17181 for ; Sat, 12 Oct 2002 01:11:06 +0200 (DST) From: "And Rosta" To: Subject: [lojban] Re: Usage deciding (was: RE: Re: [Announcement] The Alice Translation Has Moved And Changed Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2002 00:12:47 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20021011023840.GA70303@allusion.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 X-archive-position: 2161 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Jordan: > On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 01:50:56AM +0100, And Rosta wrote: > > Lojbab: > > > You and And seem to be the primary innovators who KNOW that you are > > > acting against the baseline. > > > > That's probably true, but I don't think much of my activity is contrary > > to the baseline. There is universal agreement that CLL is wrong in places > > (or near-universal agreement, I had better say, now that Jordan has > > joined the community), so either mere deviance from CLL is not necessarily > > acting against the baseline, or else there is universal agreement to > > act against the baseline. > [...] > > For the record this doesn't reflect my viewpoint. Which bit doesn't? > For example, CLL > is probably wrong about vo'a, as the ma'oste is also baselined and > had a different meaning. Also, either the ma'oste or CLL is wrong > about the exact definition of "tamsmi" (they have x2 and x3 flipped). > > However, these sorts of minor things which need clarification don't > justify breaking the things which do work. (for example, xorxes' ji'i > thing). xorxes's ji'i is a relative extreme case of deviance. (If I were xorxes I'd use experimental cmavo instead of deviantly reusing cmavo I thought broken.) --And.