From sbelknap@uic.edu Tue Dec 10 14:12:04 2002
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:12:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from larch.cc.uic.edu ([128.248.155.164])
	by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.05)
	id 18Lsbd-00068S-00
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:11:57 -0800
Received: (qmail 11786 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 22:11:50 -0000
Received: from cis5044.uicomp.uic.edu (HELO uic.edu) (128.248.250.44)
  by larch.cc.uic.edu with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 22:11:50 -0000
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:11:29 -0600
Subject: [lojban] Re: tags
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548)
Cc: lojban-list@lojban.org,
 rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org
To: John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
From: Steven Belknap <sbelknap@uic.edu>
In-Reply-To: <200212102041.PAA05250@mail2.reutershealth.com>
Message-Id: <551264C4-0C8C-11D7-A99A-000393629ED4@uic.edu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548)
X-archive-position: 3419
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: sbelknap@uic.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list

On Tuesday, December 10, 2002, at 02:28  PM, John Cowan wrote:

> Steven Belknap scripsit:
>
>> What explains
>> the insertion of the phrase "lojban is Loglan" in lojban official
>> policy? (I am aware of the history of this phrase, I am asking whether
>> there is a deeper explanation than the historical animus of that legal
>> battle.)
>
> As the person who proposed that language at an LLG meeting long ago, I 
> will
> say that it was primarily a reaction to JCB's "Lojban is not/is a 
> knockoff of
> Loglan".
>
> Today I might make it "Lojban is a Loglan".

I like that better.

-Steven