From a.rosta@ntlworld.com Mon Aug 13 18:16:17 2001
Return-Path: <a.rosta@ntlworld.com>
X-Sender: a.rosta@ntlworld.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_1); 14 Aug 2001 01:16:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 54004 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 01:16:12 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26)
  by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Aug 2001 01:16:12 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mta05-svc.ntlworld.com) (62.253.162.45)
  by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Aug 2001 01:16:12 -0000
Received: from andrew ([62.255.40.56]) by mta05-svc.ntlworld.com
          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP
          id <20010814011610.MSLI20588.mta05-svc.ntlworld.com@andrew>
          for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 02:16:10 +0100
To: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [lojban] RE: Re: Well I guess you do learn something new everyday...
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 02:14:29 +0100
Message-ID: <LPBBJKMNINKHACNDIIGMMEBCEJAA.a.rosta@ntlworld.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.4.33.0108092229540.1959-100000@reva.sixgirls.org>
From: "And Rosta" <a.rosta@ntlworld.com>
X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 9567

Xod:
> we need fluent people to settle even the formal issues. 

You may be right, but I don't see why.

> People can order coffee, or they can engage in deep theoretical
> dialogue on abstract issues. In learning, folks start with the former and
> move to the latter. 

I think I contribute a lot (measured by quality, not just quantity!)
to discussions of abstract issues, but I'd struggle to order coffee.
(I exaggerate only very slightly; it's a mere fluke that I know the
word ckafe.)

> Therefore it is critical to build a population of
> fluent people that can give Lojban the thousands of person-hours of
> dialogue and usage that are required to really settle these issues. The
> fact there may become two dialects doesn't change the fact that people
> interested in the formal must learn and learn well the colloquial. 

Why? I'm not trying to start yet another bickerthread; I'm genuinely
wondering about your reasoning.

--And.