From lojban-out@lojban.org Wed Jan 03 07:52:19 2007 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 13971 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2007 15:43:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.67.35) by m41.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2007 15:43:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail4.sea5.speakeasy.net) (69.17.117.6) by mta9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Jan 2007 15:43:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 23655 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2007 15:43:21 -0000 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.66.169]) (envelope-sender ) by mail4.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 3 Jan 2007 15:43:21 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H28Gt-0001tX-Ip for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 03 Jan 2007 07:43:20 -0800 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.66.169]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H28GR-0001s0-Pw; Wed, 03 Jan 2007 07:42:59 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 03 Jan 2007 07:42:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H28Ek-0001ql-Or for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Wed, 03 Jan 2007 07:41:07 -0800 Received: from anno.name ([81.169.186.62] helo=mail.anno.name ident=postfix) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H28Ee-0001qU-8J for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 03 Jan 2007 07:41:06 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.146] (p5085CB71.dip.t-dialin.net [80.133.203.113]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.anno.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49E6F7B734 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2007 16:40:54 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <459BCE6B.8040603@perpetuum-immobile.de> Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2007 16:40:27 +0100 User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20061222) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <000c01c72ee9$d72544b0$6601a8c0@hq.squarei.net> <459BC0B2.3090803@ropine.com> In-Reply-To: <459BC0B2.3090803@ropine.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.1.0 OpenPGP: id=21E90840 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigE3B50F76AEA82909CBF421E3" X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Score-Int: -25 X-Spam-Bar: -- X-archive-position: 13474 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: timonator@perpetuum-immobile.de 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: Seth Gordon 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? another thought that just came to my mind is that lojban allows the vowels to be spoken as long as the user desires to, so maybe i'd just say "naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa" instead of "na" :) [...] 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: 69.17.117.6 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:0:0:0 X-eGroups-From: Timo Paulssen From: Timo Paulssen Reply-To: timonator@perpetuum-immobile.de Subject: [lojban] Re: Military language X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790; y=sXktT7Wrk73b7QreN8eS6Yo54yzsF2fwFfm-ZTJ3xnYbHOSBfw X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 27914 --------------enigE3B50F76AEA82909CBF421E3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Seth Gordon 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? another thought that just came to my mind is that lojban allows the vowels to be spoken as long as the user desires to, so maybe i'd just say "naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa" instead of "na" :) --------------enigE3B50F76AEA82909CBF421E3 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" [Attachment content not displayed.] --------------enigE3B50F76AEA82909CBF421E3--