Received: from mail-fx0-f61.google.com ([209.85.161.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1P4N8m-0004nH-Ib; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 17:18:23 -0700 Received: by fxm17 with SMTP id 17sf307568fxm.16 for ; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 17:18:14 -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=xDPtyhWZp6CT+d3yssIsf0zj6QLm/Utf0059fTTqAFI=; b=PfsiX8LDfG169AWBJ5QMDqBrV3iNnkw4q04IJmEUA3gxT4GeaaWCkz/x9G3uBbNQ0a y38mtavM2jC0eE+ZwOYGnO7i0g9ys2SPi8t95KWZFyCbeNNOOHlX970z+mk9F9J32ml6 O8U6AAmzVzCVZ698iITGtfkkpfeAXuc8nSY8E= 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=Wr71nmOFJEI3MkS8U50KyYHFvX2+R7wDTKQVLue7KWRtrpAeZKu1J/3rwRnyGhxfej IOK/QAaMabNmM0oxsnxrzCndGfQYrCpzOLKFImUvNu/3/DfX5spdBJ7M87XTqB/G90UK HPSPG4S++cf7f9Dts//hSfn5jRELzfsVcL3QY= Received: by 10.223.70.141 with SMTP id d13mr87600faj.30.1286583488321; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 17:18:08 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.204.36.74 with SMTP id s10ls524263bkd.1.p; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 17:18:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.22.204 with SMTP id o12mr133911bkb.14.1286583487818; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 17:18:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.22.204 with SMTP id o12mr133910bkb.14.1286583487790; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 17:18:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-fx0-f48.google.com (mail-fx0-f48.google.com [209.85.161.48]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id u2si1246312bkd.6.2010.10.08.17.18.06; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 17:18:06 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.48 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.161.48; Received: by fxm20 with SMTP id 20so551139fxm.21 for ; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 17:18:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.239.137.140 with SMTP id l12mr93818hbl.195.1286583485642; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 17:18:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.239.162.66 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Oct 2010 17:18:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20100903032539.GY5990@digitalkingdom.org> Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2010 21:18:05 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [bpfk] BPFK work From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.48 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; contact bpfk-list+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1481 On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 9:08 PM, Jonathan Jones wrote: > > It marked as me being shepherd because the content is almost entirely mine. > I wasn't under the impression that only a shepherd could edit a shepherded > section, only that (s)he was the one /assigned/ to. I don't really know what the rules are. I prefer that if something is under my name, then other people not change what I write. But I'm perfectly happy to cede any of "my" sections to anyone who wants it, I just don't want it to be under my name if somebody else is editing it. For that reason I don't like editing other people's sections either. (Unless it's something minor like a typo, but not something like we are discussing here.) > And in {.ienai .i li'o} it attaches to the more likely than not elided > {vau}? It doesn't really attach to anything, but it is definitely not part of the bridi after ".i" > .i mi nelci lo va blanu gerku > .ienai .i ta ba'e na blanu > > That looks to me like disagreement that it's a dog. If the second line is by a second person, it's like a new text. It doesn't have to be taken as one single text. mu'o mi'e xorxes -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group. To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list?hl=en.