From sentto-44114-17329-1038769564-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Sun Dec 01 11:07:03 2002 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 01 Dec 2002 11:07:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from n1.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.64]) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.05) id 18IZQJ-0007FN-01 for lojban-in@lojban.org; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 11:06:35 -0800 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-17329-1038769564-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.194] by n1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Dec 2002 19:06:04 -0000 X-Sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 1 Dec 2002 19:06:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 92104 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 19:06:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m12.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Dec 2002 19:06:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lmsmtp03.st1.spray.net) (212.78.202.113) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 19:06:03 -0000 Received: from oemcomputer (host213-121-71-178.surfport24.v21.co.uk [213.121.71.178]) by lmsmtp03.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 184773CF07 for ; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 20:06:02 +0100 (MET) To: Message-ID: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Importance: Normal From: "And Rosta" X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@yahoogroups.com; contact lojban-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 19:08:09 -0000 Subject: [lojban] Re: Loglan Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 2818 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 Nick: > Steven, I don't get what you want the baseline statement to day > [...] > That any work be done to merge Lojban and Loglan into the same > language, or even into similar languages? I have no interest in that, > and I doubt many Lojbanists dating from after the split (the clear > majority) do either Are there actually any active Loglanists interested in such a thing? I myself was formerly in favour of rapprochement, if only so newcomers don't get posed the choice of Loglan vs Lojban. But if Loglan is now nigh-on extinct, there seems no point in rapprochement, though I would favour more actively applying the name Loglan to Lojban, to ensure that people seeking Loglan (e.g. by googling) find their way to modern Loglan, i.e. Lojban. I suppose what I'm saying is that if there isn't enough of a thriving TLI Loglan community to actually have rapprochement with, we should go the other way and more volubly declare Lojban to be Loglan. --And. To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/