From get.oren@gmail.com Sun Jan 03 22:39:28 2010 Received: from mail-pw0-f47.google.com ([209.85.160.47]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NRgb6-0006lz-Kc for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 03 Jan 2010 22:39:27 -0800 Received: by pwj10 with SMTP id 10so2448709pwj.26 for ; Sun, 03 Jan 2010 22:39:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=9vF3NQ05uCvxPbLLrRgXeihv9T5Sw99i2gcJXXv8peQ=; b=ZauDnPa/+VnqfbwpfIDof+kG93IB0wSEB8szL5fylovqOSi59v8nLSY+oYsWkWzpo1 Bzmyw6x1wXShYbk2IFic0hjQg+Tc8FhqUXePTz/5cMImVLdhT90DrqGv4Fg1mdNb+LLG UgbYk+eTqDZ5lb6P2l2u+Dg+x9/ALrCNPgnqs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; b=jD7j45iAlMVovd0f4kjD4uObsJ/NjqgewwmFpRj7fzes5CySf7tMSh6wDEzb+nMN9j iIZm2vtKoE1zBq5kku9QUB+tylxU+ePWxcMSDdNwSVGtz1+W7n1i4RYTwjUvsS/N8zqE +v7sglec23NLlVOMAoJLzNrAaPtnPFc8QpuTE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.143.27.32 with SMTP id e32mr1980756wfj.244.1262587156105; Sun, 03 Jan 2010 22:39:16 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <972918.93077.qm@web50407.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <425e4ac21001031952t22834298oa24977c0eef72d35@mail.gmail.com> <175716.17467.qm@web50408.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <27513e551001032152p76aecf6fg281271b15e2959e6@mail.gmail.com> <972918.93077.qm@web50407.mail.re2.yahoo.com> From: Oren Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 14:38:56 +0800 Message-ID: <27513e551001032238g2f1ff8c7r5973c018facdecc4@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Initial impression To: lojban-list@lojban.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00504502cc01f009d5047c50fafe --00504502cc01f009d5047c50fafe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 14:06, Lindar Greenwood wrote: > Second. Is that like an untidy person saying {.ie} ? Or am I missing the meaning of 'second?' It was one of the beginner texts I read that suggested the {jbo} + 'n/s' self-naming convention, and I didn't even realize that my name was an overloaded rafsi! I guess I liked the thin veil of mystery; a rafsi and an arbitrary consonant made my particular choice {ku'us} more subtle. Although in the name of being direct, clear and Unambiguous (which is kinda the point, right?) I think its very sensible to adopt a gismu for a name. I think that's what I'll recommend for any recruits I muster up. ...However, this sort of makes me want to think a bit harder before I reform my own name. From lojban's rather extensive set of semantic radicals, which one do I want to have associated with myself? Do I really identify with pinecones? Yet another existential decision to make! mu'o mi'e mi --00504502cc01f009d5047c50fafe Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 14:06, Lindar Greenwood <lindarthebard@yahoo.com> wrote:
&l= t;scruffy>Second.</scruffy>

Is that lik= e an untidy person saying {.ie} ? Or am I missing the meaning of 'secon= d?' =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= =A0

It was one of the beginner texts I read that suggested = the {jbo} + 'n/s' self-naming convention, and I didn't even rea= lize that my name was an overloaded rafsi!=A0

I gu= ess I liked the thin veil of mystery; a rafsi and an arbitrary consonant ma= de my particular choice {ku'us} more subtle. Although in the name of be= ing direct, clear and Unambiguous (which is kinda the point, right?) I thin= k its very sensible to adopt a gismu for a name. I think that's what I&= #39;ll recommend for any recruits I muster up.

...However, this sort of makes me want to think a bit h= arder before I reform my own name. From lojban's rather extensive set o= f semantic radicals, which one do I want to have associated with myself? Do= I really identify with pinecones? Yet another existential decision to make= !

mu'o mi'e mi
--00504502cc01f009d5047c50fafe--