From lojban-out@lojban.org Wed Jan 03 07:34:10 2007 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 77866 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2007 15:28:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.167) by m25.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2007 15:28:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail1.sea5.speakeasy.net) (69.17.117.3) by mta6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Jan 2007 15:28:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 11664 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2007 15:25:27 -0000 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.66.169]) (envelope-sender ) by mail1.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 3 Jan 2007 15:25:27 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H27zY-0001O9-9t for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 03 Jan 2007 07:25:25 -0800 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.66.169]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H27z4-0001KF-Qq; Wed, 03 Jan 2007 07:25:02 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 03 Jan 2007 07:23:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H27xp-0001Jt-B7 for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Wed, 03 Jan 2007 07:23:37 -0800 Received: from silene.metacarta.com ([65.77.47.18]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H27xj-0001Jk-BC for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 03 Jan 2007 07:23:36 -0800 Received: from localhost (silene.metacarta.com [65.77.47.18]) by silene.metacarta.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F041E14C81F3 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2007 10:23:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from silene.metacarta.com ([65.77.47.18]) by localhost (silene.metacarta.com [65.77.47.18]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 24534-05 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2007 10:23:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from [65.77.47.178] (cheyenne.metacarta.com [65.77.47.178]) by silene.metacarta.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9D5614C81FB for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2007 10:23:16 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <459BCA64.50600@ropine.com> Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2007 10:23:16 -0500 User-Agent: Debian Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20060926) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <000c01c72ee9$d72544b0$6601a8c0@hq.squarei.net> <459BC0B2.3090803@ropine.com> <925d17560701030655ia74c764x43fa0448381c7a3f@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <925d17560701030655ia74c764x43fa0448381c7a3f@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at metacarta.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Score-Int: -25 X-Spam-Bar: -- X-archive-position: 13471 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: sethg@ropine.com X-list: lojban-list X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Score-Int: -25 X-Spam-Bar: -- X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "chain.digitalkingdom.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Jorge Llambías wrote: >> Isn't there a standard to always use "NOT REPEAT NOT" in military >> telegrams to make sure the reader doesn't skip over the word? > > > Hmm... > > I wonder whether the two {na}'s in {ko na ke'u na daspo le ckule} > would cancel out? What would a robot bomber do? [...] Content analysis details: (-2.6 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 UNPARSEABLE_RELAY Informational: message has unparseable relay lines -2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] -0.0 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Originating-IP: 69.17.117.3 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:0:0:0 X-eGroups-From: Seth Gordon From: Seth Gordon Reply-To: sethg@ropine.com Subject: [lojban] Re: Military language X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790; y=l12AImmwAPHejs2ovGp-Th_rpLnG9UO8_bbjU2cC7xw13ZOLZw X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 27910 Jorge Llambías wrote: >> Isn't there a standard to always use "NOT REPEAT NOT" in military >> telegrams to make sure the reader doesn't skip over the word? > > > Hmm... > > I wonder whether the two {na}'s in {ko na ke'u na daspo le ckule} > would cancel out? What would a robot bomber do? I had assumed that there was a more long-winded way of saying "na", but I don't see it from skimming the gismu list. Maybe one should tell the bomber {ko sisti lenu pu'o daspo le ckule}? > > mu'o mi'e xorxes 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.