From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Thu Jul 06 17:16:52 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 06 Jul 2006 17:16:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1Fye1K-0001TF-KP for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Thu, 06 Jul 2006 17:16:34 -0700 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.172]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1Fye1I-0001T7-Jf for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 06 Jul 2006 17:16:34 -0700 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id j40so504757ugd for ; Thu, 06 Jul 2006 17:16:31 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=g5+7PHh4EGbgsbnNQQjON18Y6tqolqu5TyD3E0vprHWY+tFedaUi9j/zHRKHTULlDYngCT3rFYXh6V4sIQWw0jkjJjDLwGh+hDvresp4QHgLzmvICVvWzYksJj+UTmDnhizya1pnBn4XBA5wjwYit+9lr/8I5qUkq/iSzgspLGU= Received: by 10.67.22.2 with SMTP id z2mr1357066ugi; Thu, 06 Jul 2006 17:16:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.67.89.8 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Jul 2006 17:16:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2006 17:16:30 -0700 From: "Theodore Reed" To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Alphabet proposal one. In-Reply-To: <20060706235433.GJ18983@chain.digitalkingdom.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <44AD673B.7060501@gmail.com> <925d17560607061651p19623e56x7c188368533f9c48@mail.gmail.com> <20060706235433.GJ18983@chain.digitalkingdom.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.1 (--) X-archive-position: 11944 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: ted.reed@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On 7/6/06, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > On Thu, Jul 06, 2006 at 08:51:09PM -0300, Jorge Llamb?as wrote: > > If the CLL or the BPFK ever come to treat the question, my vote > > will be for it not to declare any alphabet official, since I don't > > really see the point of having an official alphabet. > > That would be my inclination as well. And mine. I tend to think that the "Usage will determine" plays into this well. I think of it this way. If someone pushed out a book of lojban in some alternate orthography, I'd be inclined to learn it so I could read the book. But a lot of people wouldn't, which is often a consideration when publishing. If you really believe in your alternate orthography, go for it, but know that a lot of people are pretty lazy. They're already putting in the effort to learn another language, many of them will just not want to learn another orthography. -- Theodore Reed (treed/bancus) www.surreality.us To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.