Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 06:10:10 -0500
From: Logical Language Group <lojbab>
Message-Id: <199502081110.AA29354@access4.digex.net>
Subject: Proposals and overload (response to something Jorge said)
X-From-Space-Date: Wed Feb  8 06:10:14 1995
X-From-Space-Address: lojbab

>(BTW, I am still waiting for an answer to my proposal to allow {ki'ubo}
>as a sumti connector as well. Sumti can already be connected by {ki'u},
>but only in forethought: {ki'ugi ko'a gi ko'e}. I would like the
>afterthought mode to be allowed too: *{ko'a ki'ubo ko'e}.)

I hadn't even seen it, and only caught it in scanning.  I am still
reading mail in detail from last August, and falling further behind
rather than gaining (and I still don't have any time to work on JL19,
and have snail mail inquiries and orders back to LogFest that I haven't
responded to, not to mention all those hidden in my 6 month mail
backlog).

I am reasonably sure that Cowan hasn't looked at it either.

Non-urgent proposals aren't going to get looked at quickly, and this one
sounds like a convenience rather than a necessity, from this little
quote - which is all I know of it.

The bottom line is that with Cowan and I having very limited Lojban time
these days, trying to keep up with list traffic rather than just
skimming it and archiving it for possible later consideration is a very
low priority.  Even doing that, and making the responses that I do make,
chews up most of the Lojban time that I have.  I don't see this
improving soon.

I LIKE the fact that you guys are debating a lot of issues.  Keep it up.
But I suggest that any substantive change idea, once hashed out, needs
to be written up in the form of Cowan's grammar change proposals (keep
the numbering separate, especially for lex issues vs. grammar ones)
showing the proposed change, the pros, the alternatives, and the cons.

For example, out of the "any" discussion, I made a list a couple a
months ago of some 20 issues that were raised and got no sense that a
consensus was reached on any of them.  I will make no decision without
such a consensus, especially if it affects existing Lojban materials.

Jorge - you seem to be managing more of the discussions than anyone.  If
you REALLY feel ambitious, you could go through the last n months of
discussion (actually as far back as you like - I have a few open issues
pending as of my August readings that I don't know were resolved) and
make a file of issues discussed and their resolution (decision,
consensus without decision, or other) if any, perhaps referencing to
some key messages (by date) when the issues were raised and resolved.
Proposals that have consent but no decision can then be written in a
concrete form like Cowan has set a standard for, that we can truly
decide on.

The concept of a baseline is that changes are controlled, and considered
discretely.  Thus far, Cowan and I have been doing all the work of
discretizing the results of discussion.  I am sure we have missed MANY
proposals, because neither of us has read much in-language text on the
list in 2+ years, and I for one have been so far behind in mail reading
that I do not consider many issues seriously unless I spot that others
have discussed it to death and reached a consensus.  In my case, I
suspect that I started losing it on following all Lojban discussions
shortly after you came aboard, since I know that I never looked closely
at your extensive comments on Cowan's papers (actually, I guess I
started losing it with Cowan's papers, since I have only read 2 or 3
of them, and the versions I read are now years old and quite forgotten.)

Sorry if this sounds like I am throwing up my hands.  But I'm stretched
way past the breaking point and I need to find ways to seriously curb my
load.  Cowan's silence and large mail backlog suggests that he is in
similar straits.  With Nick, Ivan and most other JImbobs likewise
inactive, the two of us have too much on our plates.  (I do want to
express deep appreciation to pc for what he has participated in - pc
seldom decides issues, as opposed to just clarifying or murkifying the
issues in logical terms, but usually what he does say ends up almost
always being consistent with what Cowan and I would decide.  It is nice
to get him on the record without having to relay discussions via
phonecon for his quick response, whenever we get around to it.)

lojbab