From mikevdg@gulik.co.nz Thu Feb 24 20:20:20 2005
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 24 Feb 2005 20:20:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from genamics.blastula.net ([205.214.85.184])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA:24)
	(Exim 4.34)
	id 1D4WxX-00031v-P7
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 24 Feb 2005 20:20:11 -0800
Received: from [203.184.4.127] (helo=gulik.co.nz)
	by genamics.blastula.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.43)
	id 1D4WxX-0007FR-1Z
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 17:20:12 +1300
Message-ID: <421E8FAC.6040906@gulik.co.nz>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 15:38:36 +1300
From: Michael van der Gulik <mikevdg@gulik.co.nz>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040216 Debian/1.6.x.1-10
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To:  lojban-list@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban] Re: blast from the past
References: <20050221164116.50682.qmail@web81305.mail.yahoo.com> <1109145928.8091.5.camel@localhost> <537d06d0050223001579349f71@mail.gmail.com> <20050223213414.GR29535@chain.digitalkingdom.org>
In-Reply-To: <20050223213414.GR29535@chain.digitalkingdom.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - genamics.blastula.net
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lojban.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - gulik.co.nz
X-Source: 
X-Source-Args: 
X-Source-Dir: 
X-archive-position: 9526
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: mikevdg@gulik.co.nz
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list

Robin Lee Powell wrote:

>On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 09:15:45AM +0100, Philip Newton wrote:
>  
>
>>On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 00:05:28 -0800, Theodore Reed
>><treed@surreality.us> wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>I hit google. I found both Lojban and Loglan. I initially
>>>dismissed Lojban because it appeared to be a half-assed fork
>>>from people who decided that they didn't like the way Loglan was
>>>being run
>>>      
>>>
>>That's the impression I also got the first time I came across a
>>mention of those languages :)
>>    
>>
>
>I, on the other hand:
>
>- did a web search for "logical language" (this is around 1997 or
>  so?)
>
>- found both almost immediately
>
>- asked Altivista what the difference was
>
>- discovered that Loglan was under copyright
>
>- laughed my ass off, and have ignored Loglan ever since
>  
>
Hands up all those who found Lojban from slashdot.org?

/me raises hand.

Mikevdg.