From ragnarok@pobox.com Fri Jul 11 09:23:42 2003 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 11 Jul 2003 09:23:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.intrex.net ([209.42.192.250]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19b0g4-0001m1-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 11 Jul 2003 09:23:20 -0700 Received: from craig [209.42.200.92] by smtp.intrex.net (SMTPD32-7.13) id A45F1BB015A; Fri, 11 Jul 2003 12:22:55 -0400 From: "Craig" To: Subject: [lojban] Re: "Game", "Player" Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 12:23:16 -0400 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) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: <20030711140653.42819.qmail@web41904.mail.yahoo.com> Importance: Normal X-Declude-Sender: ragnarok@pobox.com [209.42.200.92] X-archive-position: 5854 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: ragnarok@pobox.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list >> ni'o pamoi i ro prenu le tifkeinritli ka'e co'a kelci seti'u roda >I think {pamai} is better than {pamoi i} here. I suppose so. >{tifkeinritli} is a fu'ivla, {tifkeiritli} is the lujvo. r/n/l glue >can only appear after an initial CVV rafsi. Right, thank you. >Shouldn't it be {e'a} rather than {ka'e}? e'a is an attitudinal. Any person can join; not every person does and I feel enabled. >> ni'o remoi i ro prenu ka'e finti le javni poi me ra enai ro drata i fau lenu >> go'i le javni finti cu bilga lenu cusku le javini >Again, ka'e -> e'a. Again, no. >{me ra enai ro drata} means "it is him/her and nobody else". If you >mean "his/her own" I suggest {me ... moi}. I'd say: >{ni'o remai e'a ro kelci cu finti lo me ri moi javni} >"2nd. Every player may make his/her own rule(s)." >It is not clear to me how "enai ro drata" would expand here. Your rules apply only to you. They are your rules, which pertain to you and nobody else. >> ni'o cimoi i bai lenu le xabmau be loi javni be ro kelci ku ku cu tugni fi >> ledu'u de fasnu ku ku fasnu >(You don't need {ku ku} in front of {cu}.) Oh. Of course. >You mean {loi javni pe ro kelci}, I suppose. But is that the mass >of rules, each of which is associated with every player, or the mass >of rules, each of which is associated with at least one player? The latter, and I meant loi jvaste - it is about the rulesets of most players, not most rules of players. >And what does 'tugni' mean here? 'Explicitly coincide', or just >'not contradict'? Is it a majority of all rules, even rules that >have nothing to do with the fasnu in question? They have to explicitly agree that the fasnu occurs; otherwise everything would be happening unless it was stopped from doing so by a majority of players. >> ni'o mumoi i lo ralju jvaste lo feimoi javni na ka'e ponse >Does a liste ponse or vasru its members? Or something else? >se cmima? Good question. I'd guess all of the above. -- mi'e kreig daniyl fracture: I am enlightened tsali: Thought so.