From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Mon Apr 28 13:51:33 2003 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 28 Apr 2003 13:51:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rlpowell by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 19AFan-0001t9-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 13:51:17 -0700 Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 13:51:17 -0700 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: nai in UI (was: BPFK phpbb) Message-ID: <20030428205116.GH22216@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org References: <20030428194858.18292.qmail@web20506.mail.yahoo.com> <20030428162158.A32091-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030428162158.A32091-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i From: Robin Lee Powell X-archive-position: 4988 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Mon, Apr 28, 2003 at 04:36:25PM -0400, Invent Yourself wrote: > As is "jai jai jai na'e jai je'a klesi jai cupra", which was > offered by a random sentence generator, and defended by Jay as > being grammatical, and yet now we're supposed to get our panties > twisted at the fear of "nai nai nai". This is *far* from the only issue. BPFK is consensus-minus-one. I count at *least* 3 people who won't even give this idea the time of day until a complete grammar change proposal is put forth. Either put up or shut up. -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** I'm a *male* Robin. .i le pamoi velru'e zo'u crepu le plibu taxfu .i le remoi velru'e zo'u mo .i le cimoi velru'e zo'u ba'e prali .uisai http://www.lojban.org/ *** to sa'a cu'u lei pibyta'u cridrnoma toi