From LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU Sun Jan 21 22:41:33 1996
Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by locke.ccil.org (8.6.9/8.6.10) with ESMTP id QAA06300 for <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>; Sat, 20 Jan 1996 16:47:32 -0500
Message-Id: <199601202147.QAA06300@locke.ccil.org>
Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.0a) with SMTP id 18C1B0C0 ; Thu, 18 Jan 1996 15:17:35 -0500
Date:         Thu, 18 Jan 1996 13:23:34 GMT
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: TECH QUERY: variant fu'ivla
To: John Cowan <cowan@locke.ccil.org>
Status: OR
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length:  259


> >So far, the Lojban community hasn't taken a position on whether or not
> >these are to be taken as equivalent.
> >
> >I favor declaring them equivalent:
>
> So do I.

.i .uecai

I never thought I would see all the lojbo about something.  ;-)