Received: from mail-pb0-f57.google.com ([209.85.160.57]:47410) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1TrKwL-0006iF-Oz; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 20:01:06 -0800 Received: by mail-pb0-f57.google.com with SMTP id wz7sf9861295pbc.12 for ; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 20:00:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=x-received:x-beenthere:x-received:x-received:received-spf:subject :references:from:in-reply-to:message-id:date:to:mime-version :x-mailer:x-virus-checked:x-goms-validated-recipients:x-gaggle-info :x-gaggle-sender-ref-id:x-gaggle-aps-scores:x-gaggle-aps-scores :x-gaggle-aps-scores:x-gaggle-ref-id:x-virus-checked :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post :list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type; bh=Gla+qv2Bgf64UiAA3nJXQ9wryjrNE1cJYKwMlfidplo=; b=KKrFv9jUj8pPxTvT2l6ankq7ncsR7tTKFGL7AwPbLH8jKcagK+Yqb2oFlVT3r28YQK +EG1qNEJyE48H+OFo3WYJPYiMWgHZWgf1F716LTnBhV1WXXDvWhc58pLSptMHvqKqVtl okVMeYWE8u0MXueebzoCIzwyV4hMoiLkVcXAT6F8ve3QZI986MJDeFp28gnIyKUNB8xo uDOqugO9Yws0LvSt3QdV3f6wYwc+Ol8b4NPRQZy3LkiN1q0/1pSLY1mdvswfZC7YqlU7 uUUqmJgOPwH1Pz/pp5F+QMvEZMnoukDST3KcSiGqbs/mxaK+dH8+PZFvgrXDtX4jyXc4 oTaw== X-Received: by 10.50.45.170 with SMTP id o10mr106002igm.17.1357358451108; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 20:00:51 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.50.40.134 with SMTP id x6ls343019igk.21.canary; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 20:00:50 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.66.86.137 with SMTP id p9mr7643868paz.37.1357358450586; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 20:00:50 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.66.86.137 with SMTP id p9mr7643867paz.37.1357358450576; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 20:00:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx3-out.gaggle.net (mx3-out.gaggle.net. [208.81.237.193]) by gmr-mx.google.com with SMTP id js4si10977349pbb.2.2013.01.04.20.00.49; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 20:00:50 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of park.annie@asb.gaggle.net designates 208.81.237.193 as permitted sender) client-ip=208.81.237.193; Received: (qmail 5381 invoked by uid 358); 5 Jan 2013 04:00:48 -0000 Received: from [10.0.32.2] (HELO mx10.gaggle.net) (10.0.32.2) by mx3.gaggle.net (qpsmtpd/0.83) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 20:00:48 -0800 Received: from [98.81.110.125] (HELO [10.0.1.6]) (98.81.110.125) (smtp-auth username Park.Annie@asb.gaggle.net, mechanism plain) by mx10.gaggle.net (qpsmtpd/0.83) with ESMTPA; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 20:00:41 -0800 Subject: Re: [lojban-beginners] Re: Sandwich is better than eternal love. Proof. References: <7ab190d5-2f38-459d-921b-51a49a00fd2e@googlegroups.com> <21ad0ed5-0baa-4ab8-8cc1-10d60b5274e5@googlegroups.com> From: Annie In-Reply-To: <21ad0ed5-0baa-4ab8-8cc1-10d60b5274e5@googlegroups.com> Message-Id: <7A7E7A1A-D9EB-4248-AB4D-66F7B7F0EDBF@asb.gaggle.net> Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 14:45:03 -0600 To: "lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com" Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: iPod Mail (10A523) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on mx10.gaggle.net X-GOMS-Validated-Recipients: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com X-Gaggle-Info: *** This Email was sent by a student at School for the Blind. X-Gaggle-Sender-Ref-ID: 4ba428aeedef92d1a47b86d931b509d4db58715693255feb5db95e0aba129546933b41e9acc288b2af555a0b2b56f988abbe4f81370bfcd5781f957816d3137f X-Gaggle-APS-Scores: false -9.0 0 0 2 https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fd%2Fmsg%2Flojban-beginners%2F-%2FEjEfmkgs97sJ null X-Gaggle-APS-Scores: false -9.0 0 0 2 http://groups.google.com%2Fd%2Fmsg%2Flojban null X-Gaggle-APS-Scores: false -9.0 0 0 2 http://groups.google.com%2Fgroup%2Flojban null X-Gaggle-Ref-ID: 4ba428aeedef92d182f52e443d712db897f76c3b6c0a83c8 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on mx3.gaggle.net X-Original-Sender: park.annie@asb.gaggle.net X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of park.annie@asb.gaggle.net designates 208.81.237.193 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=park.annie@asb.gaggle.net Reply-To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com; contact lojban-beginners+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 300742228892 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_160_22044519.1357358442376" X-Spam-Score: 1.1 (+) X-Spam_score: 1.1 X-Spam_score_int: 11 X-Spam_bar: + X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.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: i still, after reading this message think eternal love is more important. besides, love for anamite Sent from my iPod On Dec 31, 2012, at 11:21 AM, "neizyn." <sjacket@gmail.com> wrote: The trick lies in saying that nothing is better than eternal love--which can be misread, or at least given the opposite intonation of the intended meaning. And the other thing is, saying a sandwich "is better than nothing" could be damning with faint praise, but in this case it acquires a "one in hand, 2 in the bush" kind of meaning--meaning it has potentially infinite value. Is there a way to say every alternative to being loved (e.g. going skating, or even not owning anything) is better? But I think the implication is here too is that LOVE CAN BE POSSESSED hence the eternal because you have it always. Well, to me it seems it's not so much eternal as life-long but..."I would rather have a sandwich now than someone's life-long love"? "Does being loved forever fill my stomach now?" Priorities. On Monday, December 31, 2012 4:43:07 AM UTC-5, la gleki wrote: This question appeared in the russian casnu stuzi. What can be better than eternal love? Nothing. Sandwich is better than nothing. Therefore, sandwich is better than eternal love. How can we disprove this statement in lojban? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban-beginners/-/EjEfmkgs97sJ. 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.objects is temporary, isn't it? *** This Email was sent by a student at [...] Content analysis details: (1.1 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 1.1 DATE_IN_PAST_06_12 Date: is 6 to 12 hours before Received: date -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 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 Content-Length: 6132 ------=_Part_160_22044519.1357358442376 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable i still, after reading this message think eternal love is more important. b= esides, love for anamite Sent from my iPod On Dec 31, 2012, at 11:21 AM, "neizyn." <sjacket@gmail.c= om> wrote: The trick lies in saying that nothing is better than eternal love--which ca= n be misread, or at least given the opposite intonation of the intended mea= ning. And the other thing is, saying a sandwich "is better than nothing" could be= damning with faint praise, but in this case it acquires a "one in hand, 2 = in the bush" kind of meaning--meaning it has potentially infinite value. Is there a way to say every alternative to being loved (e.g. going skating,= or even not owning anything) is better? But I think the implication is here too is that LOVE CAN BE POSSESSED hence= the eternal because you have it always. Well, to me it seems it's not so m= uch eternal as life-long but..."I would rather have a sandwich now than som= eone's life-long love"? "Does being loved forever fill my stomach now?" Pri= orities. On Monday, December 31, 2012 4:43:07 AM UTC-5, la gleki wrote: This question appeared in the russian casnu stuzi. What can be better than eternal love? Nothing. Sandwich is better than nothing. Therefore, sandwich is better than eternal love. How can we disprove this statement in lojban? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= Lojban Beginners" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban-begin= ners/-/EjEfmkgs97sJ. To post to this group, send email to loj= ban-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=3Den.objects is temporary, isn't it? *** This Email was sent by a student at School for the Blind. --=20 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=3Den. ------=_Part_160_22044519.1357358442376 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
i still, after reading this messag= e think eternal love is more important. besides, love for anamite

Se= nt from my iPod

On Dec 31, 2012, at 11:21 AM, "neizyn." <<= a href=3D"mailto:sjacket@gmail.com">sjacket@gmail.com> wrote:
The trick lies in saying that no= thing is better than eternal love--which can be misread, or at least given = the opposite intonation of the intended meaning.
And the other th= ing is, saying a sandwich "is better than nothing" could be damning with fa= int praise, but in this case it acquires a "one in hand, 2 in the bush" kin= d of meaning--meaning it has potentially infinite value.
 
Is there a way to say every alternative to being loved (e.g. going= skating, or even not owning anything) is better?
But I think the= implication is here too is that LOVE CAN BE POSSESSED hence the eterna= l because you have it always. Well, to me it seems it's not so much eternal as life-long but..."I would rather have a sandwich = now than someone's life-long love"? "Does being loved forever fill my = stomach now?" Priorities.
 
 
=
On Monday, December 31, 2012 4:43:07 AM UTC-5, la gleki wrote:
This question appeared in the russian casnu = stuzi.

What can be better than eternal love? Nothing.&n= bsp;
Sandwich is better than nothing.
Therefore, sandwich is = better than eternal love.

How can we disprove this= statement in lojban?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= Lojban Beginners" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/l= ojban-beginners/-/EjEfmkgs97sJ.
=20 To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojba= n-beginners?hl=3Den.objects is temporary, isn't it?





*** This Email w= as sent by a student at School for the Blind.

--
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=3Den.
------=_Part_160_22044519.1357358442376--