From sentto-44114-17516-1039016187-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Wed Dec 04 10:28:16 2002 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 04 Dec 2002 10:28:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from n16.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.71]) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.05) id 18JeFo-00048C-01 for lojban-in@lojban.org; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 10:28:12 -0800 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-17516-1039016187-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.196] by n16.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Dec 2002 15:36:27 -0000 X-Sender: arosta@uclan.ac.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 4 Dec 2002 15:36:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 84009 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 15:36:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 4 Dec 2002 15:36:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO com1.uclan.ac.uk) (193.61.255.3) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 15:36:26 -0000 Received: from gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk by com1.uclan.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer); Wed, 4 Dec 2002 15:02:13 +0000 Received: from DI1-Message_Server by gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 15:36:59 +0000 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.2 To: opoudjis , lojban From: And Rosta X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@yahoogroups.com; contact lojban-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 15:36:19 +0000 Subject: [lojban] Re: Baseline statement Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 3010 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: arosta@uclan.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Nick, I am cool with everything you say. (Did I manage to sound like Robin in that last sentence?) I greatly appreciate your message. On this point: # D. Good thing you don't feel strongly about abolishing unintelligible # cmavo. I do: I regard it as an intolerable baseline breaking. cmavo can # only be nuked with overwhelming support, and I'd say when external # factors make them nukable. I subsequently changed my mind, & the default position I'll be taking for them is to leave them for Usage to Decide. We don't need to discuss this further until BF is underway, but I thought I'd pipe up to reassure you I am longer suggesting the murder of innocent virgin cmavo. --And. To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/