From ragnarok@pobox.com Tue Sep 16 19:05:41 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 42297 invoked from network); 17 Sep 2003 02:05:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m16.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 17 Sep 2003 02:05:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 17 Sep 2003 02:05:40 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 19zRhL-00014b-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 16 Sep 2003 19:05:39 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19zRgP-00013A-00; Tue, 16 Sep 2003 19:04:41 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 16 Sep 2003 19:04:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.intrex.net ([209.42.192.250]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19zRgB-00012K-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 16 Sep 2003 19:04:27 -0700 Received: from craig [209.42.212.114] by smtp.intrex.net (SMTPD32-7.13) id A1131EE101B8; Tue, 16 Sep 2003 22:04:03 -0400 To: Subject: [lojban] Re: Conservative, *active* BPFK commissioners needed. Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 22:03:54 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <001d01c37ca8$ca179940$103c0751@oemcomputer> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal X-Declude-Sender: ragnarok@pobox.com [209.42.212.114] X-archive-position: 6201 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: ragnarok@pobox.com Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: "Craig" Reply-To: ragnarok@pobox.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=48763382 X-Yahoo-Profile: kreig_daniyl X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 20683 >> Second, I think the fact that both conservative and revisionist members >are >> active is precisely the reason why we aren't moving so fast. If everyone >> were a naturalist, we'd have consensus-minus-one for several issues at >this >> point. This isn't a bad thing; we revisionists do need to be reined in a >> bit. I'd say the real way to end the impasse is for people on both sides >to >> make concessions on some issues. For instance, I would dearly love to see >> ka'enai become official, but I would give it up in a heartbeat if doing so >> meant that the more actively harmful issues were resolved prior to the >heat >> death of the universe. >Is there an actual impasse? Or just an utter loss of momentum? I don't know, >but if there is an impasse it's hard to find evidence on phpbb that it has >arisen from intransigent refusal to compromise. Not refusal to compromise in theory; it's just that I have yet to see everyone stand behind any compromise. And I'm including myself there. -- .kreig.daniyl. "They didn't find it odd the Emporer was travelling around in a cart of fish?" -rlpowell ragnarok@pobox.com teucer@bnomic.org