Received: from localhost ([::1]:56856 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eVWQx-0001a4-Gn; Sat, 30 Dec 2017 21:45:19 -0800 Received: from mail-wm0-f51.google.com ([74.125.82.51]:36257) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eVWQO-0001Ve-Cd for llg-members@lojban.org; Sat, 30 Dec 2017 21:44:47 -0800 Received: by mail-wm0-f51.google.com with SMTP id b76so53793883wmg.1 for ; Sat, 30 Dec 2017 21:44:41 -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=58vGnZQiQNyWj1n7APjNw60h1wbkjX6fC7lfI/S0pec=; b=Vblko6yRnWoNRRCZEgl/gt8maiCPNY3nMlYs7vFobdNs0NZnZwV4P4BvDFkf4UNdCi zy5e/CyaCIPNgNrXa+DmrnkmlfBcQreM6+vtbZmqkcEs+FCX+iVlOVgwmlMVbUSzbYFh Tv+gskFvTBBm6GdInLYkjLOoS7QmqWM34gaIwVYMaJJcj5wirZbe6bwNHackDY87o6jb oqyF6VESbhAwZhky+ArwHKYdoMiNAGuB498cfHjHIu75Vk+buuzsl8zGg1S93EkK8cHW yOFcYfGcCUywc5G9a9QaJmx78iSa4wBQL3yCsYQSNidRqM1GP1YGHHbKIDTRTzTNw6GV VC1w== 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=58vGnZQiQNyWj1n7APjNw60h1wbkjX6fC7lfI/S0pec=; b=YBgudKvETfctacr7WfQcXM3swDFrUWyO2y5ssB1/lWJnxDjS0yDHCvxPV99QuT+Osq PibPm7rA76o0kPBhFIIdKruW1v/hKBvQl5wU1qDXc2PqXkb9fibr+8jKFdjDpXgbSZlv 2r+VPWr5qUelq2lKQikUcmqd+OR3xKjrHTvDYlXTm5MGWQaGJ011awUMV6qFQt89EG+v F2toIH1SKB6iG7o+RelU8ONEV1Q10Fif88Z1lsMLIg5iwhsDhKvHxq1geGl2JvwYOvK9 qs4QC59yeDjxHI9EQ+In5mzBPiGpBPFVmdU34637YRRXfCeh4wV3p2cCVBC2NuASosRM Bd7g== X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mKImF/xPOxvepEjjYi2PVZAl3aG1sRwV6n91qFAvRFxC3d3xnpw mSPS021ZtAr3Ia4kaRVPk0ozUuRkSooSqnhl4A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBoszrMnFk9R4TFqkOSj3Avc5YA7VcZ2lP34+yvwnqBeaoLQKqiizoS1nNwR1CldbJXlt89m3F6/dekiV2iIxlpk= X-Received: by 10.80.177.153 with SMTP id m25mr53539874edd.181.1514699072926; Sat, 30 Dec 2017 21:44:32 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.80.173.219 with HTTP; Sat, 30 Dec 2017 21:43:52 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <7074953.2veMK8YGUJ@caracal> <6c826210-9f71-1813-2957-7e5593ad18ed@lojban.org> From: Gleki Arxokuna Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2017 08:43:52 +0300 Message-ID: To: llg-members@lojban.org X-Spam-Score: -2.0 (--) X-Spam_score: -2.0 X-Spam_score_int: -19 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="===============0682974228964194648==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============0682974228964194648== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045c228e2efa8c05619c5cd9" --f403045c228e2efa8c05619c5cd9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" 2017-12-30 19:19 GMT+03:00 Curtis Franks : > > > 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. > > I abstain from voting on that since I don't have enough information on possible consequences of such new policy. There are many projects that convert logical notation to English, and I know a few projects that convert English to logical notation. I'm not sure what supporting subsets of English (like Aviation English?) could mean to LLG. > --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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Llg-members mailing list > Llg-members@lojban.org > http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members > > --f403045c228e2efa8c05619c5cd9 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


2017-12-30 19:19 GMT+03:00 Curtis Franks <curtis.w.franks@gma= il.com>:
=


On Dec 30, 2017 07:44, "And Rosta" <and.rosta@gmail.com> wrote:<= br type=3D"attribution">


On 30 Dec 2017 03:46, = "Curtis Franks" <curtis.w.franks@gmail.com> wrote:
=
Okay, maybe we should take on both projects (exploration = and promotion of logical language in general and also, separately, the expl= oration and promotion of Lojban (regardless of its status as a logical lang= uage)). We might also want to create or establish a framework for the creat= ion of a Lojban derivative which is a logical language by all previously me= ntioned standards.

How do we d= o this? What proposals or orientations are actionable?


I'd suggest three motions determining the pr= incipal aims of the LLG.

Motion 1. A principal goal of the LLG (coequal with any other principal go= als) is exploration and promotion of logical language in general.

I move:<= /span>
The LL= G shall adopt, as a principal goal of the LLG (coequal with any other princ= ipal goals), the intention of exploration and promotion of logical language= (s) in general, subject to the following definitional framework and descrip= tion:=C2=A0P= resupposing that everything effable (i.e. linguistically expressible) can b= e represented as a predicate-argument structure (PAS), a logical language (= in the technical sense, i.e. loglang) is one that (syntactically-)unambiguo= usly bidirectionally encodes an unlimited number of PASs. (Also known by so= me as the 'monoparsing' property. The relevant bidirectionality is = conversion both 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 L= ojban (regardless of its status as a logical language) as defined by docume= nts endorsed by the LLG.
<= div dir=3D"auto">
I likewise (same wordin= g) so move, with terms as described in my immediately previous motion in th= is message.


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

=
I lik= ewise so move, with terms as described in my immediately previous two motio= ns in this message.


For e= xtra clarity, add in to each motion the definition of logical language that= I gave earlier.=C2=A0

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 t= hen I'd probably have some constructive contributions to make to the en= suing discussion.


I abstain from vo= ting on that since I don't have enough information on possible conseque= nces of such new policy.

There are many projects t= hat convert logical notation to English, and I know a few projects that con= vert English to logical notation. I'm not sure what supporting subsets = of English (like Aviation English?) could mean to LLG.

=

--And.




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


On 26 Dec 2017 19:36, "Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
> The bylaws were formulated to= broadly cover a variety of forms of research into logical languages, and t= here has always been the possibility of conducting or supporting such resea= rch. But to put it simply, no one has been interested in such research EXCE= PT 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 missio= n 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 positi= on, 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 lan= guage can be achieved outside it; many promoters of Lojban (as opposed to l= ogical language) have invested much of their life's work in the enterpr= ise, and pursuing the failure of another's life's work should be av= oided where possible; therefore LLG and the Lojban community should be left= to promote (conservative) Lojban unopposed (and therefore must not be requ= ired to promote logical language).

>=C2=A0 Indeed, t= here is a strong antipathy to other "logical languages", which I = admit to sharing; I'm simply not interested, and never have been - lang= uages are too hard for me to learn, and IMHO too difficult to properly &quo= t;invent" with the complete full documentation needed for new people t= o learn and use them.=C2=A0 So I hope selpa'i will forgive me if I don&= #39;t look at his own efforts at a new "logical language".
<= div class=3D"gmail_quote" dir=3D"auto">
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.=C2=A0

The antipathy Lojbab describes exists be= cause Lojban seeks to accrue users and promotes itself by falsely claiming = to be a logical language. Any logical language is therefore a rival to Lojb= an. 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@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


--f403045c228e2efa8c05619c5cd9-- --===============0682974228964194648== 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 --===============0682974228964194648==--