From lojban+bncCOjSjrXVGBCE8ojmBBoE6hzVtQ@googlegroups.com Fri Oct 22 18:23:32 2010 Received: from mail-gx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.161.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1P9SpV-0005ru-56; Fri, 22 Oct 2010 18:23:32 -0700 Received: by gxk28 with SMTP id 28sf1585244gxk.16 for ; Fri, 22 Oct 2010 18:23:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:mime-version:received:received :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=3POQzsCKRLufcqlUOX8wBnblObL0x9gzO6YPW8nnbV8=; b=ZC07wll7q5QCqiLTvaGyoMHnCbdha/D/m1+PpnvAEXWuqDJxjNHt275GBfxDq6OGc3 NmljugcwRrieQRKhBuIW6GWSVqM4pLgWpjsaICZWv5b4GaDsl5g3UYykRcxhhavxeqTK HbMVZuSlkYdL2foskpzelqZYfQmd6uoYD/Xkw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=D3/Lo7AgcWkRgHpUVwSIrFVzdalSvFl0pOE7RNAibvxsBwhg2aQMyvrU2ysTt1pbad zjpXXAUNzpY+CQtxAAP6HzWpxQ5wK8c+YxzH0sUV8zzjnZBaCYc4iAQvEtNs3TDGf6pA RehYPjzALXCnfNGIGZnALKTR1XdgtXfooDUcA= Received: by 10.150.172.7 with SMTP id u7mr600502ybe.55.1287796996679; Fri, 22 Oct 2010 18:23:16 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.231.111.69 with SMTP id r5ls24229ibp.3.p; Fri, 22 Oct 2010 18:23:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.79.82 with SMTP id o18mr723247ibk.15.1287796995452; Fri, 22 Oct 2010 18:23:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.79.82 with SMTP id o18mr723246ibk.15.1287796995402; Fri, 22 Oct 2010 18:23:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iw0-f179.google.com (mail-iw0-f179.google.com [209.85.214.179]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id b32si2276786ibq.1.2010.10.22.18.23.14; Fri, 22 Oct 2010 18:23:14 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.179 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.179; Received: by mail-iw0-f179.google.com with SMTP id 6so415917iwn.38 for ; Fri, 22 Oct 2010 18:23:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.14.2 with SMTP id e2mr3199689iba.160.1287796993657; Fri, 22 Oct 2010 18:23:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.149.14 with HTTP; Fri, 22 Oct 2010 18:23:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4CC228C5.3060509@gmail.com> References: <2e5916b3-0d1a-4a20-bcc9-a65336245874@29g2000prb.googlegroups.com> <4CC228C5.3060509@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 21:23:13 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: mistakes From: Luke Bergen To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: lukeabergen@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.179 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lukeabergen@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00032557558a598a4b04933e9a9c --00032557558a598a4b04933e9a9c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Let me clarify. The point I was making with the imaginary discussion of jbocre was not that we are harshly overly critical but rather that we are somewhat ADD. Thanks for pointing out the beginners list And, sometimes I forget that it's there due to it's often similar content to the main list. What would be nice, is if the conversation went more like: (on lojban beginners): jbonintadni: hey, how would I say X? jbocre .abu: I would do something like "ko'a broda" jbocre .by: That would work, I'd probably do "ko'a broda do'e lo brode" but either one should be ok (on lojban main): jbocre .by: So a question was raised on beginners, let's jbodau jbocre .abu: See, here's where you're wrong .by. You told that nintadni that blah was good (and I suppose it would get the point across) but rabble rabble rabble ... jbocre .vy: ROLDEEEEEEEEEEEIIIIIIIIIIIII! This way the excruciatingly detailed debates over finer points of deep grammar and gismu choice don't scare off the little ones accidentally. On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 8:13 PM, And Rosta wrote: > Lindar, On 23/10/2010 00:19: > >> http://lesswrong.com/lw/3h/why_our_kind_cant_cooperate >> http://www.liveingreatness.com/the-core-protocols/perfection-game.html >> >> Can we discuss ways to cooperate and make criticism less apparent? >> I would like everybody to do me a big favour. Even if you've read both >> of those (however many times), please read both of them one more time. >> Tell me what you think, tell me your ideas for how we can start >> implementing these ideas to make a more harmonious Lojbanistan. >> > > I struggle to see the relevance of the Perfection Game. It could be > relevant to the ongoing perfection of Lojban, if there were such a thing as > the ongoing perfection of Lojban, but there isn't. If what's meant is the > achievement of error-free Lojban usage, what sort of person would choose to > learn Lojban, with its focus on logic, explicit rules, and so forth, yet > wish the mistakes in their utterances to not be pointed out to them? > > As for "Why our kind can't cooperate", I think it's mostly bollocks. Of > course totalitarianism is better at delivering concerted action than > pluralism is. But it's my impression that "the > atheist/libertarian/technophile/sf-fan/early-adopter/programmer/etc crowd" > is conspicuously interested in seeking optimal voting methods and > consensus-forming techniques. Or take the trade union movement, very much a > child of the Enlightenment, born both of rationalism and of passion, and > achieving monumental feats of cooperation. > > Lojbanistan seems pretty harmonious to me, now only an occasional visitor. > But if it's not, what's wanted? Harmony for harmony's sake? Why? Why not > just freedom of expression coupled with mutual respect? Harmony for the sake > of greater goals? Which goals? Is there harmonious agreement on goals? > > IIRC, the Lojban-beginners list was set up as a forum for people to > practice in a supportive nonthreatening environment free from overzealous > highly technical critiques of the sort I was guilty of so much of. But that > was a specially designated kindergarten environment -- a good place to have, > but you wouldn't want it to take over the whole country. > > --And. > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "lojban" group. > To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. --00032557558a598a4b04933e9a9c Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Let me clarify. =A0The point I was making with the imaginary discussion of = jbocre was not that we are harshly overly critical but rather that we are s= omewhat ADD.

Thanks for pointing out the beginners list = And, sometimes I forget that it's there due to it's often similar c= ontent to the main list. =A0What would be nice, is if the conversation went= more like:

(on lojban=A0beginners):
jbonintadni: =A0hey,= how would I say X?
jbocre .abu: I would do something like "= ko'a broda"
jbocre .by: =A0 That would work, I'd pro= bably do "ko'a broda do'e lo brode" but either one should= be ok

(on lojban main):
jbocre .by: =A0So a questio= n was raised on beginners, let's jbodau
jbocre .abu: See, her= e's where you're wrong .by. =A0You told that nintadni that blah was= good (and I suppose it would get the point across) but rabble rabble rabbl= e
...
jbocre .vy: =A0ROLDEEEEEEEEEEEIIIIIIIIIIIII!
<= br>
This way the excruciatingly detailed debates over finer point= s of deep grammar and gismu choice don't scare off the little ones acci= dentally.

On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 8:13 PM, And Ro= sta <and.rosta@= gmail.com> wrote:
Lindar, On 23/10/2010 00:19:
http://lesswrong.com/lw/3h/why_our_kind_cant_cooperate
http://www.liveingreatnes= s.com/the-core-protocols/perfection-game.html

Can we discuss ways to cooperate and make criticism less apparent?
I would like everybody to do me a big favour. Even if you've read both<= br> of those (however many times), please read both of them one more time.
Tell me what you think, tell me your ideas for how we can start
implementing these ideas to make a more harmonious Lojbanistan.

I struggle to see the relevance of the Perfection Game. It could be relevan= t to the ongoing perfection of Lojban, if there were such a thing as the on= going perfection of Lojban, but there isn't. If what's meant is the= achievement of error-free Lojban usage, what sort of person would choose t= o learn Lojban, with its focus on logic, explicit rules, and so forth, yet = wish the mistakes in their utterances to not be pointed out to them?

As for "Why our kind can't cooperate", I think it's mostl= y bollocks. Of course totalitarianism is better at delivering concerted act= ion than pluralism is. But it's my impression that "the atheist/li= bertarian/technophile/sf-fan/early-adopter/programmer/etc crowd" is co= nspicuously interested in seeking optimal voting methods and consensus-form= ing techniques. Or take the trade union movement, very much a child of the = Enlightenment, born both of rationalism and of passion, and achieving monum= ental feats of cooperation.

Lojbanistan seems pretty harmonious to me, now only an occasional visitor. = But if it's not, what's wanted? Harmony for harmony's sake? Why= ? Why not just freedom of expression coupled with mutual respect? Harmony f= or the sake of greater goals? Which goals? Is there harmonious agreement on= goals?

IIRC, the Lojban-beginners list was set up as a forum for people to practic= e in a supportive nonthreatening environment free from overzealous highly t= echnical critiques of the sort I was guilty of so much of. But that was a s= pecially designated kindergarten environment -- a good place to have, but y= ou wouldn't want it to take over the whole country.

--And.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojba= n?hl=3Den.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.
--00032557558a598a4b04933e9a9c--