Date:  Tue, 17 Feb 1998 19:42:33 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199802180042.TAA07984@locke.ccil.org>
Reply-To: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>
From: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>
Subject:      Re: more perversity (was Re: more epistemic perversity (wa
X-To:         lojban <lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
X-UIDL: 78363eac436909f48cbec7f28730d098
X-Mozilla-Status: 8011
X-From-Space-Date: Wed Feb 18 16:03:52 1998
X-From-Space-Address: -

Lojbab:
> As long as the debate is confined to English,
>then my intent has at least as much weight as anything else except the
>prescription (which is vague).

i le se casnu ba'e na se jimte le glico i mu'a la goran pu ca'a jinvi
bau la lojban i ku'i do toljundi lei se darlu pe bau la lojban

>The fact that they argue with me rather than simply agree to disagree
>suggests that somehow some amount of unclearness persists.
>("They" in this case being predominantly Jorge %^)

i li'a mi do tugni le du'u mi do toltugni

co'o mi'e xorxes