Received: from localhost ([::1]:55274 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eSyRp-0000SI-4I; Sat, 23 Dec 2017 21:03:41 -0800 Received: from mail-wm0-f67.google.com ([74.125.82.67]:43646) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eSyRH-0000Qv-Q4 for llg-members@lojban.org; Sat, 23 Dec 2017 21:03:09 -0800 Received: by mail-wm0-f67.google.com with SMTP id n138so27938994wmg.2 for ; Sat, 23 Dec 2017 21:03:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=W1K71wrMAnTO/PBYXUG5+vqmoEccdy+hyEo9DNMMwKw=; b=JxQMBKqMH87cQSZ6H4k7GnwlXt9/U2531oyIIkoGK9EfkqYd7Y15pKVVIRpG5WFW4M T+9Rwo16zuVDgMYcmOqMbdBMbHINqOK5G+YCrtgU3RjSOanEDQk/RPAz/91xHwOQ6/ic PL1D44KaxBwjLtQ8jNFa5VsJcBoRvbZHo37pSao+RJSBMn96956LBrn88rflXaETkyRJ FQJ07XX8uITNusznDj0ktb6Dm+yyHGa3hq5EGu6P9w2QIgBZiPyFprtdPva3M2U5WVKn J/eIJre5qGNky2+/IqSwg3IL2DusHklScosaVf6p9a8KoM/ZYrfUUgDEiN2opkxB+hHp CD+w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=W1K71wrMAnTO/PBYXUG5+vqmoEccdy+hyEo9DNMMwKw=; b=hzyfyC2jEgOmhpgI7wjWxYahrdtg3Q3/nB9Q23xf3HxgFHogkNtMNXntKpWl+klYyw kkHHjCqy2Fd0mQNTGEttnAphzjgN/9hHNDV749Vgzx4T0cuA+l94XFXSNURSCC/X1gLd pw7Hhuw36KaKl3vEuQ0dyy12Y9MmyIXgCdir3QYzg7Nkw72JgKli0BPiXXHVbdEIgQss +MihcoewIr40/hBqe84lpsZBhcSVcACJCuDyKeYa7fEVB7D+FDRmtqdo1QKSpE+jmWHq QTUo3xMBCXLOCJw5YikUdupaTchLi5Uscvsac2Q/cKIWwcUqwZpHt6GzHMvYY3WsuSrM JMug== X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mIgvlmvsHEiaR0UKhK3eF637wlFPZCr5LbXULy1hfMErZN4t1hl MA3VtyGyQ6fZCFf3q2w5bHoRhmn0/pdYPpBZxg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBou3ggwjh/mNaQnDty1gPm4j2h9XYeAGctMEWX6vD2PbWpR/qDoVszbX2mTGrqtcvAQMLMrahTOEN7CQeXYy7FI= X-Received: by 10.80.139.180 with SMTP id m49mr22677499edm.36.1514091780710; Sat, 23 Dec 2017 21:03:00 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.80.173.219 with HTTP; Sat, 23 Dec 2017 21:02:20 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <92D76729-D752-4738-BF24-2D5A6A0ACD4F@gmail.com> <0c93ad4b-af16-779b-229c-be364311fe23@selpahi.de> <20BF77A3-4FF6-4423-A493-61D1D22230C2@gmail.com> From: Gleki Arxokuna Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2017 08:02:20 +0300 Message-ID: To: llg-members@lojban.org X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.5 X-Spam_score_int: -14 X-Spam_bar: - Subject: Re: [Llg-members] Unfinished Business: BPFK X-BeenThere: llg-members@lojban.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: llg-members@lojban.org Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7810970132656285968==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============7810970132656285968== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c19578ebf26ee05610ef639" --94eb2c19578ebf26ee05610ef639 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 2017-12-24 3:47 GMT+03:00 selpahi : > On 22.12.2017 23:51, Riley Martinez-Lynch wrote: > >> Setting aside questions of scope =E2=80=94 lojbanists, I am told, almost= always >> get those wrong =E2=80=94 I can=E2=80=99t reconcile the idea that lojban= gave up the ghost >> with the fact that, even as plugged in as I am not, I=E2=80=99m aware of= new songs >> and stories composed in lojban, the production of an hour-long animation= , >> and people in chat {na=E2=80=99e slabu be mi} conversing in uninterrupte= d lojban. >> > > Almost all of the music is done by me or guskant. > > There's actually very little Lojban being spoken on IRC anymore. This yea= r > had many long periods of dead silence on IRC (and not just there). That's > why the "Lojban is dead" meme became a thing. > > I understand that for those who are intensely involved on a day-to-day >> basis, it=E2=80=99s frustrating to invest the energies that you do, and = not to find >> others matching your contributions. On the other hand, if you zoom out a= nd >> look at the history of lojban, isn=E2=80=99t this the rule? Whether it= =E2=80=99s lojbab >> trying to resuscitate Loglan after it had been dismantled by years of JC= B=E2=80=99s >> =E2=80=9Cengineering interventions=E2=80=9D, or John Cowan taking it on = himself to see that >> the reference grammar got finished, or Robin persisting through years of >> drudgery to make sure that we could update and re-publish it =E2=80=94 a= nd so on. >> Asymmetries of effort are the rule, not the exception. >> > > That's a fair point. > > I do not for a moment doubt that you have paid your dues, {doi selpa=E2= =80=99i}. >> You are entitled to feel disappointed, disillusioned, frustrated. Nobody >> could blame you for cutting your losses. I sincerely hope that you conti= nue >> making more beautiful things with lojban and shining light into the dark >> corners of the language, but you don=E2=80=99t owe that to me or anybody= else. >> > > I feel *guilt* when I don't work on my Lojban projects. I'm a person who > has skipped vacations to work on Lojban projects. I have sacrificed large > chunks of my life to this language. The only other person I know who know= s > this guilt is Robin, which is ironic, because he didn't owe the community > anything either and never got the help he asked for, but he pulled throug= h > by himself. > > Also, I *am* currently working on my second album. > > Working on Lojban this much, I have found that I am reaching the limits o= f > what Lojban is allowing me to express. I cannot see a good way out of the > limited vocabulary, *especially* not with the current morphology (my > Simpler morphology article has been put on hold until I feel like there's > any hope for this language). > > As a wise fella once put it, LLG is not the "getting things done" arm of >> the Lojban community. That said, we do have it as our mission to promote >> the study of the relationships between language, thought and human cultu= re, >> and to support the community of people learning artificially-engineered >> natural language, etc. We haven=E2=80=99t exactly covered ourselves in g= lory so >> far, but if we=E2=80=99re going to improve, it=E2=80=99s going to take l= eadership: That >> continues to be a bigger problem than laziness or lethargy. A bigger >> problem than language management, too. >> > > Who wants to take leadership of an organization with no apparent purpose > (the LLG has clearly given up on the goals stated in the bylaws)? It > doesn't help to keep saying "We need this or that", while nothing ever > changes. > > If it's going to take leadership, as you say, then that needs to be made > more concrete and then acted upon. Are you suggesting we throw out the > current officers and elect a new president? If not, what is to be done > *now*? > > I continue to believe that there is much to be gained by continuing to >> work with lojban, not only in spite of its imperfections, but because of >> them. If it turns out that something can=E2=80=99t be fixed, either beca= use of >> deep-seated commitments in the structure of the language, or because the >> language community rejects the remedy, that=E2=80=99s something that lan= guages >> which have yet to be specified can learn from. >> > > Yes. I learned a lot from Lojban's mistakes and avoided them as best as I > could in my loglang Toaq, which I published this September. > > It may have once been true that it was impossible to resolve certain >> problems because of the rigidity of the baseline and a disparity of >> organizational representation between generations of lojbanists. I don= =E2=80=99t >> think that reflects the current situation. We haven=E2=80=99t been fixin= g things >> that are within our power to fix. >> >> Why is it, for example, that nearly fifteen years after xorlo was >> approved by BPFK, CLL continues to use {le} as the default gadri? >> > > mezohe has done some (a lot of?) work updating CLL for xorlo. I haven't > looked into it in detail because I've grown allergic to projects that hav= e > gleki in it. That's also why I've moved further and further away from BPF= K > work. gleki just drives me up the wall. I find him completely impossible = to > work with. Destructive, irrational and unable or unwilling to use logic. Fixing mistypes in CLL is irrational, sure. > I do appreciate his contributions in other areas (chat bridges, dictionar= y > stuff, even the wiki work). > > If I had to guess, it=E2=80=99s less because of the grunt work involved t= o >> implement the changes than the fact that although most people would agre= e, >> not everyone will. That=E2=80=99s where a lack of leadership holds us ba= ck: Without >> willingness to engage in the unglamorous business of building rough >> consensus, the commons stagnate. It=E2=80=99s less work for individuals = to >> incorporate insights into their idiolects than to educate others and >> institutionalize the learning. It=E2=80=99s easier to resign one=E2=80= =99s self to others=E2=80=99 >> lack of initiative than to stick one=E2=80=99s neck out and risk persona= l failure., >> or even just ill-considered criticism. >> > > A well-spoken account of what seems to be the reality of the situation. > > If a =E2=80=9Ctake no prisoners=E2=80=9D solution to lojban=E2=80=99s ill= =E2=80=99s includes >> consensus-building and the kind of follow-up that will ensure the >> availability of up-to-date reference and learning materials, let=E2=80= =99s talk >> about what it would take to make that happen. But please take a moment t= o >> think about what you=E2=80=99d be signing yourself up for, too. >> > I think you will understand if *I* will not be signing myself up for > anything anytime soon. > > ~~mi'e la selpa'i > > --- > Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren gepr=C3=BCft. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > Llg-members mailing list > Llg-members@lojban.org > http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members > --94eb2c19578ebf26ee05610ef639 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


2017-12-24 3:47 GMT+03:00 selpahi <selpahi@selpahi.de>:=
On 22.12.2017 23:51, Ri= ley Martinez-Lynch wrote:
Setting aside questions of scope =E2=80=94 lojbanists, I am told, almost al= ways get those wrong =E2=80=94 I can=E2=80=99t reconcile the idea that lojb= an gave up the ghost with the fact that, even as plugged in as I am not, I= =E2=80=99m aware of new songs and stories composed in lojban, the productio= n of an hour-long animation, and people in chat {na=E2=80=99e slabu be mi} = conversing in uninterrupted lojban.

Almost all of the music is done by me or guskant.

There's actually very little Lojban being spoken on IRC anymore. This y= ear had many long periods of dead silence on IRC (and not just there). That= 's why the "Lojban is dead" meme became a thing.

I understand that for those who are intensely involved on a day-to-day basi= s, it=E2=80=99s frustrating to invest the energies that you do, and not to = find others matching your contributions. On the other hand, if you zoom out= and look at the history of lojban, isn=E2=80=99t this the rule? Whether it= =E2=80=99s lojbab trying to resuscitate Loglan after it had been dismantled= by years of JCB=E2=80=99s =E2=80=9Cengineering interventions=E2=80=9D, or = John Cowan taking it on himself to see that the reference grammar got finis= hed, or Robin persisting through years of drudgery to make sure that we cou= ld update and re-publish it =E2=80=94 and so on. Asymmetries of effort are = the rule, not the exception.

 That's a fair point.

I do not for a moment doubt that you have paid your dues, {doi selpa=E2=80= =99i}. You are entitled to feel disappointed, disillusioned, frustrated. No= body could blame you for cutting your losses. I sincerely hope that you con= tinue making more beautiful things with lojban and shining light into the d= ark corners of the language, but you don=E2=80=99t owe that to me or anybod= y else.

 I feel *guilt* when I don't work on my Lojban projects. I'm a perso= n who has skipped vacations to work on Lojban projects. I have sacrificed l= arge chunks of my life to this language. The only other person I know who k= nows this guilt is Robin, which is ironic, because he didn't owe the co= mmunity anything either and never got the help he asked for, but he pulled = through by himself.

Also, I *am* currently working on my second album.

Working on Lojban this much, I have found that I am reaching the limits of = what Lojban is allowing me to express. I cannot see a good way out of the l= imited vocabulary, *especially* not with the current morphology (my Simpler= morphology article has been put on hold until I feel like there's any = hope for this language).

As a wise fella once put it, LLG is not the "getting things done"= arm of the Lojban community. That said, we do have it as our mission to pr= omote the study of the relationships between language, thought and human cu= lture, and to support the community of people learning artificially-enginee= red natural language, etc. We haven=E2=80=99t exactly covered ourselves in = glory so far, but if we=E2=80=99re going to improve, it=E2=80=99s going to = take leadership: That continues to be a bigger problem than laziness or let= hargy. A bigger problem than language management, too.

 Who wants to take leadership of an organization with no apparent purpose (t= he LLG has clearly given up on the goals stated in the bylaws)? It doesn= 9;t help to keep saying "We need this or that", while nothing eve= r changes.

If it's going to take leadership, as you say, then that needs to be mad= e more concrete and then acted upon. Are you suggesting we throw out the cu= rrent officers and elect a new president? If not, what is to be done *now*?=

I continue to believe that there is much to be gained by continuing to work= with lojban, not only in spite of its imperfections, but because of them. = If it turns out that something can=E2=80=99t be fixed, either because of de= ep-seated commitments in the structure of the language, or because the lang= uage community rejects the remedy, that=E2=80=99s something that languages = which have yet to be specified can learn from.

 Yes. I learned a lot from Lojban's mistakes and avoided them as best as= I could in my loglang Toaq, which I published this September.

It may have once been true that it was impossible to resolve certain proble= ms because of the rigidity of the baseline and a disparity of organizationa= l representation between generations of lojbanists. I don=E2=80=99t think t= hat reflects the current situation. We haven=E2=80=99t been fixing things t= hat are within our power to fix.

Why is it, for example, that nearly fifteen years after xorlo was approved = by BPFK, CLL continues to use {le} as the default gadri?

mezohe has done some (a lot of?) work updating CLL for xorlo. I haven't= looked into it in detail because I've grown allergic to projects that = have gleki in it. That's also why I've moved further and further aw= ay from BPFK work. gleki just drives me up the wall. I find him completely = impossible to work with. Destructive, irrational and unable or unwilling to= use logic.

Fixing mistypes in CLL is irrat= ional, sure.

=C2=A0
I do appreciate his contributions in other areas (chat bridges, = dictionary stuff, even the wiki work).

If I had to guess, it=E2=80=99s less because of the grunt work involved to = implement the changes than the fact that although most people would agree, = not everyone will. That=E2=80=99s where a lack of leadership holds us back:= Without willingness to engage in the unglamorous business of building roug= h consensus, the commons stagnate. It=E2=80=99s less work for individuals t= o incorporate insights into their idiolects than to educate others and inst= itutionalize the learning. It=E2=80=99s easier to resign one=E2=80=99s self= to others=E2=80=99 lack of initiative than to stick one=E2=80=99s neck out= and risk personal failure., or even just ill-considered criticism.

 A well-spoken account of what seems to be the reality of the situation.

If a =E2=80=9Ctake no prisoners=E2=80=9D solution to lojban=E2=80=99s ill= =E2=80=99s includes consensus-building and the kind of follow-up that will = ensure the availability of up-to-date reference and learning materials, let= =E2=80=99s talk about what it would take to make that happen. But please ta= ke a moment to think about what you=E2=80=99d be signing yourself up for, t= oo.
I think you will understand if *I* will not be signing myself up for anythi= ng anytime soon.

~~mi'e la selpa'i

---
Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren gepr=C3=BCft.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


_______________________________________________
Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@loj= ban.org
http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-= members

--94eb2c19578ebf26ee05610ef639-- --===============7810970132656285968== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Llg-members mailing list Llg-members@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members --===============7810970132656285968==--