Received: from localhost ([::1]:34840 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eXM4t-0006AK-MO; Thu, 04 Jan 2018 23:06:07 -0800 Received: from mail-vk0-f54.google.com ([209.85.213.54]:33496) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eXM4L-00069G-5P for llg-members@lojban.org; Thu, 04 Jan 2018 23:05:35 -0800 Received: by mail-vk0-f54.google.com with SMTP id g69so2571977vkg.0 for ; Thu, 04 Jan 2018 23:05:32 -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=CnewnHtlag3tcRML58eqAKKORnmL0Qtg3f5isbZfWZs=; b=ml6pr4BDM4jmjC2Byos+po2xedsvUyc0+43mnpJ8VmUjVBlCE9wC+CtE5TWvTR9zEG sIwdyk0/A11Sje52BMPvD4lJAPlx7mquAZd1RbSPzTqkoDdNEI6jQ6OySjotp3qWfxYZ lC6F2RFZh8FmseXEr9PCDgjA1dRSUKBWUfiELNIKzIVrCIL85iOlYq7jaymUyNipekuu lAiiSKCNN2N0HTyBcVOWUY1W4qAl8kg/DRYBpa/foK70XL8o225fW85ZpkVDgB/uMNHV 1RRnTLd/BjuSxRXqNXMdzDAbXzEGMND36PXzG5SQkg/PF05Xh8phdDEJ+yf9EJTVIkSp 2uMw== 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=CnewnHtlag3tcRML58eqAKKORnmL0Qtg3f5isbZfWZs=; b=ElDlslouHNzc2ljopBJWRr7n3VrXmAOSE+N1Le6KcK7tCKZKfZvZhUJjuJNpbCL0w9 PoYMtbL/JXq/ivezyrsPbOBqgqr7VdoK+yF29b/kAhk7hN7Jvj/go12Icgv7w6uCLwq9 icfk5MRCJAYkVA/kBl/ew4NjWxb9PTdbX3E05Mz/KbUEw7gel2cbUCBCOtNm4XmSVT6A uQtAyZOTP6Ol73Bu9GE3UJVQjmRi0U/jI+hp1YVR9wE2yFo6QofIYIoGehNt9N0VCWjg YoHw/SpRGPOnxDamuluniIuuacrAgF7GSoyf00HQ8sOInQhTE4GK0CLXarNyMPEQLXPK HOEQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxytfwPnHRzkGcX2nutyEGJsAN4f214piggHXWZ6HgPXT2uCxAgVGn KmYICBMyDcFdTFokPvCL0YN1Gx0ADwtHwaFbeyg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBotxyxLXVUoIVSmWk9FoiWt8cP/0shV4V4eOxdmeogrLTmgyBTR9ZLPkphLY7viRZ/UTuWGaK/5w+OB9dGt/Jdg= X-Received: by 10.31.223.129 with SMTP id w123mr1857870vkg.13.1515135925997; Thu, 04 Jan 2018 23:05:25 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.176.27.18 with HTTP; Thu, 4 Jan 2018 23:05:25 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.176.27.18 with HTTP; Thu, 4 Jan 2018 23:05:25 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <78156dc5-1fb3-4e9d-992c-a8f30facc4fd@googlegroups.com> From: Creative Care Services Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 02:05:25 -0500 Message-ID: To: llg-members@lojban.org X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.0 X-Spam_score_int: -9 X-Spam_bar: - Subject: Re: [Llg-members] LLG join request 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="===============8682210332633776044==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============8682210332633776044== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c07dc90a7d5540562021261" --94eb2c07dc90a7d5540562021261 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Jan 4, 2018 00:39, "Timothy Lawrence" < timothy.lawrence@connect.qut.edu.au> wrote: Hello, I was recommended to join LLG to help update the CLL in terms of fixing mistypes and giving similar feedback. I am a novice user of Lojban, at the moment. I hope I may be able to assist as time allows :) Thanks, Timothy / kurji ------------------------------ *From:* lojban@googlegroups.com on behalf of Gleki Arxokuna *Sent:* Wednesday, 8 November 2017 4:56 PM *To:* lojban@googlegroups.com *Subject:* Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban You can join LLG by sending a request in English to llg-members@lojban.org In case you get no reply please report. ------------------------------ *From:* lojban@googlegroups.com on behalf of Timothy Lawrence *Sent:* Wednesday, 8 November 2017 12:01 PM *To:* lojban@googlegroups.com *Subject:* Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban > Ok, can you join BPFK committee or LLG to help us update CLL at least in terms of fixing mistypes? Alright sure, if they are happy with a novice joining :) ------------------------------ *From:* lojban@googlegroups.com on behalf of Gleki Arxokuna *Sent:* Wednesday, 8 November 2017 12:20 AM *To:* lojban@googlegroups.com *Subject:* Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban 2017-11-07 16:49 GMT+03:00 Timothy Lawrence : *"You can learn the language described here with assurance that it will not be subject to further fiddling by language-meisters."* - Complete Lojban Language http://lojban.github.io/cll/1/2/ I only use CLL Lojban. I believe that an unambiguous language needs to have a central, singular version to stay unambiguous. I don't know much about the history of OpenGL but it, from a surface level, seems similar to the history of C++, which I am familiar with. By and large, new features are added to the C++ language, but every version is backwards-compatible with older versions (and almost entirely compatible with its predecessor, C). An older compiler might choke on new language features, but a new compiler will always work with old code. Compiler vendors may introduce their own language features as forks (and they are not considered standard C++), but there is always a standard/"strict" mode that can be enabled. Most good features that compilers introduce have been added to the official version, perhaps changed in a way to integrate them better. This is what I think Lojban should be like. *I want all new / official Lojban versions to be CLL-compatible.* *> "jbo_*" (imagine "jbo_FR", "jbo_EN", "jbo_CA"...),* I do not want there to be "jbo_A", "jbo_B", "jbo_C"... that are all incompatible. I do want "jbo_1", "jbo_2", "jbo_3"..., where it's a sequential chronology and each is a more improved (but backwards-compatible) version. A tool could explicitly support "jbo_2" and it would implicitly support "jbo_1". If a tool just says it supports "jbo", it would be presumed to support the latest. Remember though that Lojban is not a programming language in that its grammar is not fully formal, only parts of it are. It's quite possible and noted that there can be internal bugs (even if those are mistypes in its English documentation) that won't make Lojban "compile".1 *> But this group ("committee"?) should accept the fact that language will evolve, whether they like it or not.* I hope that this means that they accept the language can change, by backwards-compatible design and *not* evolution via drift. C++ does not at all "evolve" like a natural language and I don't think Lojban should, either. Because C++ has maintained a centralised standard and continued to update, I think it possible for Lojban to do so. *> What is clear, however, is that people don't want to use CLL Lojban (despite the fact that it is still the most thoroughly documented version).* I do. I do as well. Further, the fact that the beginner mysteries I see recommended most often do NOT teach solely CLL lojban so I doubt many learning the realize for quite a while that they aren't learning it. This means it is impossible to say that many or most speakers /learners would not have chosen CLL over other versions of presented at the beginning with the information that it is currently the official version. .karis. I still don't know what it means "clear". How can person not want to use CLL Lojban if 'ey doesn't speak it? Bad tutorials? CLL being hard to understand? But if we are talking about fluent speakers then does it matter what they want to speak when they already speak CLL Lojban and the rest doesn't have documentation? I think most people want to use the latest version of something. I see the CLL Lojban as the latest version, for the backwards-compatibility reasons mentioned above. I have seen CLL-incompatible versions advertised on the website and new learners are likely to intuit that it's intrinsically better to choose the "latest version", not knowing that learning the modern versions entails embracing a schism. *> To be frank, I feel a bit betrayed. I feel bad because my hope was that Lojban was more that just an experiment. Someone, please, prove me it is...* This is so true for me, and one of the reasons that I became more quiet (although I am writing an unannounced novel that contains CLL Lojban). *> I just don't want to spend time learning things if they would be thrown away in a few months/years* *> sykynder: You mention re-integrating forks back into the core language. How do you change something and then make it the same as it was before?* I believe all official Lojban changes must be backwards-compatible for Lojban to succeed in its goal of being unambiguous (let alone succeed in other ways, such as adoption). *> E.g. learning a revised meaning {lo} is no big deal.* It's not just about learning, it's about effort invested in writing tools, texts, chatbots and parsers (et cetera). It's about breaking that promise in the CLL that the language will not be subject to further fiddling. Introducing changes that break Lojban compatibility will - waste invested time in the older version - waste invested money in buying the older CLL (etc) - alienate those who wasted their time/money - introduce more ambiguity (The Lojban version changes the meaning!!) (Why did CLL-{le} become modern-{lo} and the modern-{le} get introduced, instead of just introducing the new {lo} to mean what modern-{le} means and keeping CLL-{le} as the default?) well, {le} didn't become {lo} in most dialects ... As learning a revised meaning is no big deal, simply redoing these changes to be compatible with CLL Lojban should be no big deal ;) *"Lojban does not yet have nearly the vocabulary it needs to be a fully usable language of the modern world"* - Complete Lojban Language http://lojban.github.io/cll/1/2/ If we can agree to move forward using CLL Lojban and only make backwards-compatible changes, then I can personally say I'll be happy to resume devoting time, energy and money into Lojban. Ok, can you join BPFK committee or LLG to help us update CLL at least in terms of fixing mistypes? Lojban's usefulness as an unambiguous language is so important to me. It doesn't have to be "perfect" or "better", it just has to be unambiguous and complete. I want to help complete Lojban, and any processes of governance surrounding it, to reunite it. Thanks for reading, mi'e la timoteios. ------------------------------ *From:* lojban@googlegroups.com on behalf of sukender1@gmail.com *Sent:* Monday, 6 November 2017 6:04 AM *To:* lojban *Subject:* [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban Wow. This is even worse than I thought. One great thing about Lojban is that it is supposed to be unique. What I read here is like if people said "Hey, I invented a Lojban-French", and "Me, a Lojban-Chinese", and "Lojban-English"... That sounds so stupid. Let me be clear: I'm *NOT *judging anyone forking Lojban. Surely they had good reasons to do so. Actually nobody can pretend forseeing any case, and write an "immutable" language. So yes, it is obvious that the language evolves and will evolve, even an hypothetic "official an unique" Lojban. What is unfortunate is that all forking work should be reintegrated in some way to the "trunk", or else we'll end up with many "Lojbans" wich will actually kill Lojban (whatever version). I understand the lack of leadership, but it feels more like a lack of structures for democraty. It would be nice to have such structures, but unfortunately I don't know how this could be initiated. One idea would be to mimic software, a bit as OpenGL did, having the core, extensions, and proposals. To be frank, I feel a bit betrayed. I feel bad because my hope was that Lojban was more that just an experiment. Someone, please, prove me it is... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/to pic/lojban/e94H-wdh5gc/unsubscribe. To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. _______________________________________________ Llg-members mailing list Llg-members@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members --94eb2c07dc90a7d5540562021261 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Jan 4, 2018 00:39, "Timothy Lawrence" <timothy.lawrence@connect.qut.e= du.au> wrote:

Hello,

I was recommended to join LLG to help update the CLL in terms of fixin= g mistypes and giving similar feedback.

I am a novice user of Lojban, at the moment. I hope I may be able to= =C2=A0assist as time allows :)


Thanks,

Timothy / kurji



From:= =C2=A0lojban@g= ooglegroups.com <lojban@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Gleki Arxokuna <= ;gleki.is.m= y.name@gmail.com>
Sent:=C2=A0Wednesday, 8 November 2017 4:56 PM
To:=C2=A0lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject:=C2=A0Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban

You can join LLG by sendi= ng a request in English to=C2=A0llg-members@lojban.org=C2=A0In case you get no reply p= lease report.

From: = lojban@googleg= roups.com <lojban@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Timothy Lawrence <timothy= .lawrence@connect.qut.edu.au>
Sent: Wednesday, 8 November 2017 12:01 PM
To: loj= ban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban
=C2=A0

>=C2=A0Ok, can you join BPFK comm= ittee or LLG to help us update CLL at least in terms of fixing mistypes?


Alright sure,=C2=A0if they are happy with a novice joining :)


From: lojban@googl= egroups.com <lojban@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name= @gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, 8 November 2017 12:20 AM
To: loj= ban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban
=C2=A0


2017-11-07 16:49 GMT+03= :00 Timothy Lawrence <timothy.lawrence@connect.qut.edu.au>:
"You can learn the language described here with assurance that= it will not be subject to further fiddling by language-meisters."=
- Complete Lojban Language http://lojban.github.io/cll/1/2/

I only use CLL Lojban. I believe that an unambiguous language needs to have= a central, singular version to stay unambiguous.

I don't know much about the history of OpenGL but it, from a surface le= vel, seems similar to the history of C++, which I am familiar with.
By and large, new features are added to the C++ language, but every version= is backwards-compatible with older versions (and almost entirely compatibl= e with its predecessor, C).
An older compiler might choke on new language features, but a new compiler = will always work with old code.

Compiler vendors may introduce their own language features as forks (and th= ey are not considered standard C++), but there is always a standard/"s= trict" mode that can be enabled. Most good features that compilers int= roduce have been added to the official version, perhaps changed in a way to integrate them better.

This is what I think Lojban should be like.

I want all new / official Lojban versions to be CLL-compatible.



> "jbo_*" (imagine &= quot;jbo_FR", "jbo_EN", "jbo_CA"...),
I do not want there to be "jbo_A", "jbo_B", &quo= t;jbo_C"... that are all incompatible.

I do want "jbo_1", "jbo_2", "jbo_3"..., where= it's a sequential chronology and each is a more improved (but backward= s-compatible) version.

A tool could explicitly support "jbo_2" and it would implicitly s= upport "jbo_1". If a tool just says it supports "jbo", = it would be presumed to support the latest.


Remember though that Lojban is not a programming language in that its = grammar is not fully formal, only parts of it are. It's quite possible = and noted that there can be internal bugs (even if those are mistypes in it= s English documentation) that won't make Lojban "compile".1
=C2=A0



> But this group ("commit= tee"?) should accept the fact that language will evolve, whether they = like it or not.

I hope that this means that they accept the language can change, by backwar= ds-compatible design and not evolution via drift.

C++ does not at all "evolve" like a natural language and I don= 9;t think Lojban should, either. Because C++ has maintained a centralised s= tandard and continued to update, I think it possible for Lojban to do so.


> What is clear, however, is t= hat people don't want to use CLL Lojban (despite the fact that it is st= ill the most thoroughly documented version).

I do.

<= /div>
I do as well. Further, the fact that the beginner my= steries I see recommended most often do NOT teach solely CLL lojban so I do= ubt many learning the realize for quite a while that they aren't learni= ng it. This means it is impossible to say that many or most speakers /learn= ers would not have chosen CLL over other versions of presented at the begin= ning with the information that it is currently the official version.=C2=A0<= /div>

.karis.=C2=A0

I= still don't know what it means "clear". How can=C2=A0 person= not want to use CLL Lojban if 'ey doesn't speak it? Bad tutorials?= CLL being hard to understand? But if we are talking about fluent speakers = then does it matter what they want to speak when they already speak CLL Lojban and the rest doesn't have documentation?

=C2=A0
I think most people want to use the latest version of something. I see= the CLL Lojban as the latest version, for the backwards-compatibility reas= ons mentioned above.

I have seen CLL-incompatible versions advertised on the website and new lea= rners are likely to intuit that it's intrinsically better to choose the= "latest version", not knowing that learning the modern versions = entails embracing a schism.

> To be frank, I feel a bit be= trayed. I feel bad because my hope was that Lojban was more that just an ex= periment. Someone, please, prove me it is...

This is so true for me, and one of the reasons that I became more quiet (al= though I am writing an unannounced novel that contains CLL Lojban).

> I just don't want to spe= nd time learning things if they would be thrown away in a few months/years<= /span>

> sykynder: You mention re-integrating forks back= into the core language. How do you change something and then make it the s= ame as it was before?

I believe all official Lojban changes must be backwards-compatible f= or Lojban to succeed in its goal of being unambiguous (let alone succeed in= other ways, such as adoption).



> E.g. learning a revised mean= ing {lo} is no big deal.

It's not just about learning, it's about effort invested in = writing tools, texts, chatbots and parsers (et cetera).
It's about breaking that promise in the CLL that the language will not = be subject to further fiddling.

Introducing changes that break Lojban compatibility will
- waste invested time in the older version
- waste invested money in buying the older CLL (etc)
- alienate those who wasted their time/money
- introduce more ambiguity (The Lojban version changes the meaning!!)

(Why did CLL-{le} become modern-{lo}
and the modern-{le} get introduced, instead of just introducing the ne= w {lo} to mean what modern-{le} means and keeping CLL-{le} as the default?)=

well, {le} didn't become {lo} in most dialects ...
=C2=A0

As learning a revised meaning is no big deal, simply redoing these changes = to be compatible with CLL Lojban should be no big deal ;)



"Lojban does not yet have nearly the vocabulary it needs to be a fu= lly usable language of the modern world"
- Complete Lojban Language http://lojban.github.io/cll/1/2/

If we can agree to move forward using CLL Lojban and only make backwards-co= mpatible changes, then I can personally say I'll be happy to resume dev= oting time, energy and money into Lojban.

Ok, can you join BPFK committee or LLG to help us update CLL at least = in terms of fixing mistypes?

=C2=A0
Lojban's usefulness as an unambiguous language is so important to = me.

It doesn't have to be "perfect" or "better", it jus= t has to be unambiguous and complete.


I want to help complete Lojban, and any processes of governance surrounding= it, to reunite it.

Thanks for reading,


mi'e la timoteios.

From: lojban@googleg= roups.com <lojban@googlegroups.com> on behalf of sukender1@gmail.co= m <sukender= 1@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, 6 November 2017 6:04 AM
To: lojban
Subject: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban
=C2=A0
Wow. This is even worse than I thought.

One great thing about Lojban is that it is supposed to be unique. What= I read here is like if people said "Hey, I invented a Lojban-French&q= uot;, and "Me, a Lojban-Chinese", and "Lojban-English".= .. That sounds so stupid.

Let me be clear: I'm NOT judging anyone forking Lojban. Sur= ely they had good reasons to do so. Actually nobody can pretend forseeing a= ny case, and write an "immutable" language. So yes, it is obvious= that the language evolves and will evolve, even an hypothetic "official an unique" Lojban.

What is unfortunate is that all forking work should be reintegrated in= some way to the "trunk", or else we'll end up with many &quo= t;Lojbans" wich will actually kill Lojban (whatever version).

I understand the lack of leadership, but it feels more like a lack of = structures for democraty. It would be nice to have such structures, but unf= ortunately I don't know how this could be initiated. One idea would be = to mimic software, a bit as OpenGL did, having the core, extensions, and proposals.




To be frank, I feel a bit betrayed. I feel bad because my hope was tha= t Lojban was more that just an experiment. Someone, please, prove me it is.= ..

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lo= jban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Goog= le Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/lojban/e94H-wdh5gc/unsubscribe<= /a>.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lo= jban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lo= jban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

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


--94eb2c07dc90a7d5540562021261-- --===============8682210332633776044== 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 --===============8682210332633776044==--