Message-Id: <199602051605.SAA00181@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Mon, 5 Feb 1996 11:21:18 -0500
Reply-To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Subject:      Politics
To:         Lojban List <lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>
In-Reply-To:  <199602051022.FAA20515@locke.ccil.org> from "Steven M. Belknap"
              at Feb 4, 96 03:53:18 pm
Content-Length: 3091
Lines: 68

la stivn. cusku di'e

> Here is where I believe we agree:
>
> 1. Baselining the language is important to encourage development of a
> community of speakers.
> 2. Failure to achieve broad consensus regarding changes which are
> officially implemented in lojban after baselining may have a corrosive,
> destructive effect on the language.
> 3. Formal change to the language after baselining should be very hard, and
> should be delayed for five to ten years after initial baselining.
> 4. The future of lojban is best served by seeking a consensus among those
> who are most committed to the language, as demonstrated by expertise in
> using lojban, willingness to participate in projects involving lojban, and
> value of past contributions made.
> 5. Some previous conlangs have been stillborn because of the political
> incompetence of their creators.
> 6. "Those who do not remember their past are condemned to relive it."

I agree with all of this.

> Here is where I believe we have yet to agree:
>
> 1. Slang lojban is acceptable in lojban utterances.

I agree with this too.

> 2. A formal apparatus of some sort (i.e., a lojban academy) will be helpful
> in assuring the future development of lojban.

I'm undecided on this one.  In any event, I would suggest that the
connotations of "academy", both in the general context and in the
specific context of the Loglan Project, are bad; try "Language Office"
(as I understand it is called in Finland).

> 3. The lojban academy will periodically survey problems with the language,
> slang usage in the community of lojban speakers, and advancements in the
> science of linguistics, and incorporate improvements and corrections to the
> official specification of the language where this seems advisable.

These do seem the sorts of things that a Language Office ought to do.
However, there is a subtle distinction to be made in the last point.
As refgrammar author, I make a sharp distinction between changes to the
refgrammar that reflect changes to the language, and changes that reflect
better understanding of the unchanged language.  On a trivial level, typos
are always open to correction; on a higher level, some portions may be
badly explained; higher up yet, I may have failed to understand some
feature and produced a complete botch in trying to explain it.  Changes
to correct these are totally asynchronous with changes in the language,
and are unaffected by any baselining.

> 4. Politics is unavoidable wherever there is a resource, a threat, and more
> than two people. lojban central must acknowledge this, and plan
> accordingly.

No doubt about this one either.  I believe that lojbab rejects politics
as a value, not a fact; I half sympathize, but am willing to let him
take the heat for it.

> 5. "Dead battles, like dead generals, hold the military mind in their dead
> grip and Germans, no less than other peoples, prepare for the *last* war."
> (from "1914" by Barbara Tuchman, emphasis mine)

Indubitably.

--
John Cowan                                      cowan@ccil.org
                e'osai ko sarji la lojban.