Received: from mail-gx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.161.189])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <lojban-beginners+bncCICntNPQBRDNl4XrBBoEiApsTQ@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1PrCrD-0007MQ-3i; Sun, 20 Feb 2011 09:14:06 -0800
Received: by gxk19 with SMTP id 19sf2093835gxk.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Sun, 20 Feb 2011 09:13:57 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=domainkey-signature:x-beenthere:date:from:reply-to:to:message-id
         :in-reply-to:subject:mime-version:x-original-sender:precedence
         :mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender
         :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type;
        bh=KcZHYTsiLNRD46B7/nRN5ywAMo1kOOCC/obU1Yq5xDU=;
        b=VbTSMl58BSGMM40T7K4urHV1zV2ZB1TRvRwqBXTR7mBvEpe1SQbP3GJjGYO+d1OTyv
         3YeDrDfqNZxFeifdC9qn8ZowHrj9o9xl3Soi/BJi3n6fKAiNmBLZAlajXUdHVIMlts7I
         C4LrrYWStBM79mpq3GN6PVAqnlf5imgMwOMAQ=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=x-beenthere:date:from:reply-to:to:message-id:in-reply-to:subject
         :mime-version:x-original-sender:precedence:mailing-list:list-id
         :list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe
         :list-unsubscribe:content-type;
        b=USdmryIPApt6Sztw9NPwVH5cdn+uiTJfTQpQBiyPyB5LtMnX/E0KkuU1rtTzF+RkHq
         VtShkjuBPtw2fFtc6VFI+/xaC085BuM3XgGTqHmvub89zrfCRVRm2H4YcO7GUXhSr5st
         MVJy6GpPH3046zcIlgYl4AL4KN94j3Kz1tDsg=
Received: by 10.90.31.19 with SMTP id e19mr54080age.29.1298222029142;
        Sun, 20 Feb 2011 09:13:49 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.90.57.2 with SMTP id f2ls912842aga.0.p; Sun, 20 Feb 2011
 09:13:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.91.96.3 with SMTP id y3mr55219agl.41.1298222028526;
        Sun, 20 Feb 2011 09:13:48 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 09:13:47 -0800 (PST)
From: Lindar <lindarthebard@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
Message-ID: <27724557.358.1298222027773.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@prcm18>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik6QQt3prhiF=pH_xa8MBi+u2_w=UMCZLZQOs6d@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban-beginners] Question about {roda}
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Original-Sender: lindarthebard@yahoo.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com; contact lojban-beginners+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <lojban-beginners.googlegroups.com>
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners/post?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban-beginners+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en_US>
Sender: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners/subscribe?hl=en_US>,
 <mailto:lojban-beginners+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners/subscribe?hl=en_US>,
 <mailto:lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_357_14893213.1298222027770"
X-Spam_score: 0.4
X-Spam_score_int: 4
X-Spam_bar: /
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "chain.digitalkingdom.org", has
 identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original message
 has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
 similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
 the administrator of that system for details.
 
 Content preview:  That seems to be a safe restriction in a non-gluteal interpretation,
    but saying that {roda} can have implicit semantic restrictions based on context
    may not be safe. Does that mean that every instance of {roda} has an implicit
    {poi} clause? [...] 
 
 Content analysis details:   (0.4 points, 5.0 required)
 
  pts rule name              description
 ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
  0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM          Sender email is freemail (lindarthebard[at]yahoo.com)
 -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW      RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low
                             trust
                             [209.85.161.189 listed in list.dnswl.org]
  1.3 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net
               [Blocked - see <http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?209.85.161.189>]
  0.0 DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED   No valid author signature, adsp_override is
                             CUSTOM_MED
 -0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
  1.6 FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD      'From' yahoo.com does not match 'Received' headers
 -1.9 BAYES_00               BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
                             [score: 0.0000]
  0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
  0.1 DKIM_SIGNED            Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid
 -0.1 DKIM_VALID             Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
  0.0 RFC_ABUSE_POST         Both abuse and postmaster missing on sender domain
  0.0 T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL
Content-Length: 1470

------=_Part_357_14893213.1298222027770
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

That seems to be a safe restriction in a non-gluteal interpretation, but 
saying that {roda} can have implicit semantic restrictions based on context 
may not be safe. Does that mean that every instance of {roda} has an 
implicit {poi} clause?

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.


------=_Part_357_14893213.1298222027770
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1

That seems to be a safe restriction in a non-gluteal interpretation, but saying that {roda} can have implicit semantic restrictions based on context may not be safe. Does that mean that every instance of {roda} has an implicit {poi} clause?

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.<br />
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.<br />

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.<br />



------=_Part_357_14893213.1298222027770--