From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Mon Dec 02 09:08:38 2002 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 02 Dec 2002 09:08:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from lmsmtp01.st1.spray.net ([212.78.202.111]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18Iu3e-0008QV-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 02 Dec 2002 09:08:35 -0800 Received: from oemcomputer (host81-7-63-205.surfport24.v21.co.uk [81.7.63.205]) by lmsmtp01.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64DF71E792 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 18:08:03 +0100 (MET) From: "And Rosta" To: Subject: [lojban] Re: Prayers to Lord Zipf (was: Why we should cancel the vote or all voteNO (was Official Statement- LLG Board approves new baseline policy)) Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:10:11 -0000 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) In-Reply-To: <20021201185038.T52499-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Importance: Normal X-archive-position: 2885 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 xod: > Rearranging cmavo to appease Zipf should be done by renegade users. The BF > lacks (and should continue to lack) the mandate for such a thing. The BF > is for cleaning up the existing language, not for altering it to propitate > competing idols That is the issue, yes: to what extent we build in a bit of slack to accommodate future users, and to what extent we make things very rigid and oblige the chafers to go renegade. (Neither of us are ideally placed to pronounce on this, me because fixity holds comparatively little charm for me, and you because you opine that Lojban use can quite satisfactorily and fruitfully be a solitary activity independent of any speech community.) --And.