Received: from [::1] (port=51306 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eVJri-0005ac-FM; Sat, 30 Dec 2017 08:20:06 -0800 Received: from mail-yb0-f177.google.com ([209.85.213.177]:38707) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eVJrC-0005Y2-GG for llg-members@lojban.org; Sat, 30 Dec 2017 08:19:35 -0800 Received: by mail-yb0-f177.google.com with SMTP id 129so15440539ybe.5 for ; Sat, 30 Dec 2017 08:19:34 -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=54VEhLXCUpWR/pSE9JsclkTdh+efsxaV+mo3325cKcw=; b=Su+zGLOHlJI0HTCzB2uhsLLG0vj1g18pj73LMKukuKSTIZilmTFcUs8yNLZc+tXR7o UvMdhB2qKvASWNSPWIFlWV1GlXJ6IZyd1A2orGPkvENLZOlagDBKy7hrj6agTkupCsE0 4myxUYPEhJIjRrxt4fVwiTw72g5Ls+tk8gLxv1yt4JPPuNwfn9FnQMEXpqZnGsc6vgeJ N50PLC5hXXQ4/fQ00te20CDImWF3dWxk8B5bpeP0Q/eVh2wvk6zJWaxMKJabaPvPgDO8 xNtf3xutU1x+vLcmNraB3KZcrEoz9Uql5fRqdVQ6Xg3MV6pIMAekoUeoFipwxd3SSYlu GMyg== 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=54VEhLXCUpWR/pSE9JsclkTdh+efsxaV+mo3325cKcw=; b=E+eBCENIOks8pct9++RgnOYOmzv2MNT3EYWrIgoqciKxRfX8GLZz+uBBkTidh6wZPG fUK7nF4sUntCfLcpi3JJm2Pp7Zgm3FW8y9DqhSjBv9Y6I8XvFO9GVoxoFYfYybCxN2Nu 0pGuBvF8PWtc2zK+24gLlbfNPkJc2WcmDSExWYt13VVHM8X5HArPckOxx5MYo2jPD0Ha iQ0Z9IrS36NwYvaysm9EKFK58taoXEM/1IJnBnwE2iVHsxyWuuuPkih7DokZ0Sc7VoGf 1fbRcNtxkhAjOwzkm/1AngtHRCWWzrBmE7z3P0MxsvaI6IblCbQUl+Sky949C/xTib57 U6rQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mLvho+VXllM0ezApxusFnFbjEPSJhDP9N8CfxM3wdXmc01xXpvS CVAmU5ZQkgzqvu7NFD6Fmxon4nrsfjEZSaF+sXQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBouCdaqLE+dzMo0RcY1cmbazsjMyV9Obf7zbIUDt9jFVFW46qbnwlXA5RQ1Uf+6G1ke164yo9VffDCLUwgLO4XQ= X-Received: by 10.37.144.141 with SMTP id t13mr28441909ybl.249.1514650767896; Sat, 30 Dec 2017 08:19:27 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.37.135.9 with HTTP; Sat, 30 Dec 2017 08:19:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.37.135.9 with HTTP; Sat, 30 Dec 2017 08:19:26 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <7074953.2veMK8YGUJ@caracal> <6c826210-9f71-1813-2957-7e5593ad18ed@lojban.org> From: Curtis Franks Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2017 11:19:26 -0500 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="===============6260159227925163183==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============6260159227925163183== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e08329c1cfab5970561911c5f" --089e08329c1cfab5970561911c5f Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Dec 30, 2017 07:44, "And Rosta" wrote: On 30 Dec 2017 03:46, "Curtis Franks" wrote: Okay, maybe we should take on both projects (exploration and promotion of logical language in general and also, separately, the exploration and promotion of Lojban (regardless of its status as a logical language)). We might also want to create or establish a framework for the creation of a Lojban derivative which is a logical language by all previously mentioned standards. How do we do this? What proposals or orientations are actionable? I'd suggest three motions determining the principal aims of the LLG. Motion 1. A principal goal of the LLG (coequal with any other principal goals) is exploration and promotion of logical language in general. I move: The LLG shall adopt, as a principal goal of the LLG (coequal with any other principal goals), the intention of exploration and promotion of logical language(s) in general, subject to the following definitional framework and description: Presupposing that everything effable (i.e. linguistically expressible) can be represented as a predicate-argument structure (PAS), a logical language (in the technical sense, i.e. loglang) is one that (syntactically-)unambiguously bidirectionally encodes an unlimited number of PASs. (Also known by some as the 'monoparsing' property. The relevant bidirectionality is conversion both from PAS to phonological form and from phonological form to PAS.) Motion 2. A principal goal of the LLG (coequal with any other principal goals) is promotion of Lojban (regardless of its status as a logical language) as defined by documents endorsed by the LLG. I likewise (same wording) so move, with terms as described in my immediately previous motion in this message. Motion 3. A principal goal of the LLG (coequal with any other principal goals) is creation of a Lojban derivative that is a logical language. I likewise so move, with terms as described in my immediately previous two motions in this message. For extra clarity, add in to each motion the definition of logical language that I gave earlier. If Motion 1 were to pass, then I'd have some modest concrete suggestions for what LLG could do (and I would apply to rejoin LLG). If Motion 3 were to pass then I'd probably have some constructive contributions to make to the ensuing discussion. --And. On Dec 29, 2017 10:30, "And Rosta" wrote: > > > On 26 Dec 2017 19:36, "Bob LeChevalier" wrote: > > The bylaws were formulated to broadly cover a variety of forms of > research into logical languages, and there has always been the possibility > of conducting or supporting such research. But to put it simply, no one has > been interested in such research EXCEPT in the form of promoting and > studying the use of Lojban. > > That statement is patently false and wilfully amnesiac. > > I was for many years the most vocal proponent of the LLG's mission to > explore logical language, as opposed to the mission to promote Lojban. As a > member of LLG and the Lojban community I eventually changed my position, > but this was because it became increasingly evident to me that the two > goals (of exploring and promoting logical language, versus promoting > Lojban) are in fact antithetical; within LLG and the Lojban community, a > victory for the one goal can be achieved only through the defeat of the > other; but success in the goal of promoting Lojban can be achieved only > within LLG and the Lojban community, whereas success in the goal of > promoting logical language can be achieved outside it; many promoters of > Lojban (as opposed to logical language) have invested much of their life's > work in the enterprise, and pursuing the failure of another's life's work > should be avoided where possible; therefore LLG and the Lojban community > should be left to promote (conservative) Lojban unopposed (and therefore > must not be required to promote logical language). > > > Indeed, there is a strong antipathy to other "logical languages", which > I admit to sharing; I'm simply not interested, and never have been - > languages are too hard for me to learn, and IMHO too difficult to properly > "invent" with the complete full documentation needed for new people to > learn and use them. So I hope selpa'i will forgive me if I don't look at > his own efforts at a new "logical language". > > This is all true, except that the Lojban that Lojbab endorses is not a > logical language, for all that it might falsely advertise itself as such. > > The antipathy Lojbab describes exists because Lojban seeks to accrue users > and promotes itself by falsely claiming to be a logical language. Any > logical language is therefore a rival to Lojban. And Lojban's false claim > to be a logical language, coupled with its comparative fame, is an obstacle > to -- a distraction from -- the promotion of logical language. > > > > > So LLG can adopt such research, if some LLG members want to do so, but > until then LLG considers supporting Lojban to be the best way to promote > the purposes described in the Bylaws. > > > Again, patent bullshit. > > > While I would be only too delighted for the LLG to promote the purposes > described in the Bylaws, that would entail deprecating Lojban in its > baselined and current forms. Given that LLG recruits from the Lojban > community rather than from the logical language community, it is obviously > and not unreasonably the case that the large majority of LLG members > prioritize the promotion of Lojban over the promotion of the purposes > described in the Bylaws. > > --And. > > _______________________________________________ > Llg-members mailing list > Llg-members@lojban.org > http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members > > _______________________________________________ Llg-members mailing list Llg-members@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members _______________________________________________ Llg-members mailing list Llg-members@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members --089e08329c1cfab5970561911c5f Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Dec 30, 2017 07:44, "And Rosta" <and.rosta@gmail.com> wrote:


On 30 = Dec 2017 03:46, "Curtis Franks" <curtis.w.franks@gmail.com> wrote:<= br type=3D"attribution">
Okay, maybe we should take on both projects (exploration and p= romotion of logical language in general and also, separately, the explorati= on and promotion of Lojban (regardless of its status as a logical language)= ). We might also want to create or establish a framework for the creation o= f a Lojban derivative which is a logical language by all previously mention= ed standards.

How do we do thi= s? What proposals or orientations are actionable?
<= /div>


I'd suggest three motions determining the princip= al aims of the LLG.

Moti= on 1. A principal goal of the LLG (coequal with any other principal goals) = is exploration and promotion of logical language in general.

<= span style=3D"font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">I move:
=
The LLG shall adop= t, as a principal goal of the LLG (coequal with any other principal goals),= the intention of exploration and promotion of logical language(s) in gener= al, subject to the following definitional framework and description:=C2=A0<= /span>Presupposing = that everything effable (i.e. linguistically expressible) can be represente= d as a predicate-argument structure (PAS), a logical language (in the techn= ical sense, i.e. loglang) is one that (syntactically-)unambiguously bidirec= tionally encodes an unlimited number of PASs. (Also known by some as the &#= 39;monoparsing' property. The relevant bidirectionality is conversion b= oth from PAS to phonological form and from phonological form to PAS.)


Motion 2.=C2=A0A principal goal of the LLG (coequal with any other principal = goals) is promotion of Lojban (regardless of its status as a logical langua= ge) as defined by documents endorsed by the LLG.

I like= wise (same wording) so move, with terms as described in my immediately prev= ious motion in this message.


Motion 3.=C2=A0A prin= cipal goal of the LLG (coequal with any other principal goals) is creation = of a Lojban derivative that is a logical language.=C2=A0
=

I likewise so move, with terms as = described in my immediately previous two motions in this message.

=

For= extra clarity, add in to each motion the definition of logical language th= at I gave earlier.=C2=A0

If Motio= n 1 were to pass, then I'd have some modest concrete suggestions for wh= at LLG could do (and I would apply to rejoin LLG). If Motion 3 were to pass= then I'd probably have some constructive contributions to make to the = ensuing discussion.
<= font face=3D"sans-serif">
--And.




On = Dec 29, 2017 10:30, "And Rosta" <and.rosta@gmail.com> wrote:


On 26 Dec 2017 19:36, "Bob Le= Chevalier" <= lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
> The bylaws were formulated to broadly cover a variety of forms of r= esearch into logical languages, and there has always been the possibility o= f conducting or supporting such research. But to put it simply, no one has = been interested in such research EXCEPT in the form of promoting and studyi= ng the use of Lojban.

That statement is patently false = and wilfully amnesiac.

I was for many years the most vo= cal proponent of the LLG's mission to explore logical language, as oppo= sed to the mission to promote Lojban. As a member of LLG and the Lojban com= munity I eventually changed my position, but this was because it became inc= reasingly evident to me that the two goals (of exploring and promoting logi= cal language, versus promoting Lojban) are in fact antithetical; within LLG= and the Lojban community, a victory for the one goal can be achieved only = through the defeat of the other; but success in the goal of promoting Lojba= n can be achieved only within LLG and the Lojban community, whereas success= in the goal of promoting logical language can be achieved outside it; many= promoters of Lojban (as opposed to logical language) have invested much of= their life's work in the enterprise, and pursuing the failure of anoth= er's life's work should be avoided where possible; therefore LLG an= d the Lojban community should be left to promote (conservative) Lojban unop= posed (and therefore must not be required to promote logical language).

>=C2=A0 Indeed, there is a strong antipathy to other &q= uot;logical languages", which I admit to sharing; I'm simply not i= nterested, and never have been - languages are too hard for me to learn, an= d IMHO too difficult to properly "invent" with the complete full = documentation needed for new people to learn and use them.=C2=A0 So I hope = selpa'i will forgive me if I don't look at his own efforts at a new= "logical language".

This is all true, except= that the Lojban that Lojbab endorses is not a logical language, for all th= at it might falsely advertise itself as such.=C2=A0

The= antipathy Lojbab describes exists because Lojban seeks to accrue users and= promotes itself by falsely claiming to be a logical language. Any logical = language is therefore a rival to Lojban. And Lojban's false claim to be= a logical language, coupled with its comparative fame, is an obstacle to -= - a distraction from -- the promotion of logical language.




So LLG can adopt such research, if some LLG members want to do so, but unti= l then LLG considers supporting Lojban to be the best way to promote the pu= rposes described in the Bylaws.

Again, patent bullshit.=C2=A0


While I w= ould be only too delighted for the LLG to promote the purposes described in= the Bylaws, that would entail deprecating Lojban in its baselined and curr= ent forms. Given that LLG recruits from the Lojban community rather than fr= om the logical language community, it is obviously and not unreasonably the= case that the large majority of LLG members prioritize the promotion of Lo= jban over the promotion of the purposes described in the Bylaws.=C2=A0

--And.

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


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



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


--089e08329c1cfab5970561911c5f-- --===============6260159227925163183== 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 --===============6260159227925163183==--