[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: fundamentalism: reply to Nick

And, you're forcing my hand. Therefore I choose (I):

(I) The BF is nonnegotiably fundamentalist, and the CLL is right
in every respect where it cannot be shown to unsalvageably
contradictory or in conflict with basic Loglan principles. The
BF will work to complete the documentation of Standard Lojban
(Catnyjbo).

The alternative (majority vote, agree to disagree) is public schismaticism, and is intolerable to me.

(I) is what the charter says, and however many patches I would like to apply to Standard Lojban to address formalist concerns, fundament still trumps formalism in my programme. My hand is forced, and my die is cast.

Because I am not infinite, and want to abandon Lojban for historical linguistics eventually --- and for ideological reasons of my own --- I will not join you for Lojban Mark II.

The BF can choose to try to emulate in SL bits of AL in the
hope that SL will become good enough to stop people preferring AL.

That is my professed aim. Whether you choose to collaborate in that aim, or abstain from it as something you regard as illegitimate, is up to you. Your participation in the BPFK is not conditional on it.

I'll settle for that. I am sublimely unhappy about it, but if that's the only way to have you on board, it'll have to do.

---
DR NICK NICHOLAS. nickn@unimelb.edu.au
FRENCH & ITALIAN, UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA.
In Athens, news spreads fast: they know everything as soon as it happens,
sometimes before it happens, and often without it happening at all.
--- Jean Psichari, _My Voyage_. http://www.opoudjis.net