Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by locke.ccil.org (8.6.9/8.6.10) with ESMTP id KAA22116 for <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>; Fri, 13 Oct 1995 10:50:12 -0400
Message-Id: <199510131450.KAA22116@locke.ccil.org>
Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v0.1a) with SMTP id 651AA5B4 ; Fri, 13 Oct 1995 10:23:26 -0400
Date:         Fri, 13 Oct 1995 15:23:28 BST
Reply-To: Don Wiggins <dwiggins@BFSEC.BT.CO.UK>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Don Wiggins <dwiggins@BFSEC.BT.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: "ko" considered bad
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Status: OR
X-From-Space-Date: Fri Oct 13 10:50:13 1995
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU

> You get the imperative of all the other pro-sumti by saying "doimi"  doido'o
> etc. if it is not clear who "ko" is referring to.  Of course, if you are
> talking to yourself, it ius obvious who "ko" is.

.uasai

This is were this problem came from - I was trying to say
    *.i ko po'u mi'o ku'o citka
    Let's eat.
So this should be
    .i doimi'o ko citka

"ko" considered good.

co'o dn.