Oops

[Nick Nicholas <opoudjis@optushome.com.au>]

OK, that last message was not meant for jboske.

It is a legitimate question though: how is what I'm doing manifestly 
more or less dangerous for Lojban than what And is doing? because I 
profess some fundamentalism? But there was nothing about emergent 
anything in the prescription --- that is purely a creature of jboske. 
So how am I, too, not merely tinkering?

And I'm sorry, Bob, but in doing jboske work, I do have to ignore you. 
In the BPFK I do not, inasmuch as you have a vote and jboske is only 
one faction. But this is not the BPFK forum; this is where some 
lojbanists come up with proposals that might be presented to the BPFK 
forum; and where I am trying to steer such solutions towards the 
broadest acceptability while still serving formal principles. You will 
not be hindered from rejecting; but we will not be hindered from 
proposing. If that means you need to tune out of jboske again, then 
we'll see you with a gadri proposal in a few months.

///
A freshman once observed to me: Nick Nicholas, PhD,
On the edge of the Rubicon French/Italian, Univ. of Melbourne.
Men don't go fishing. nickn@unimelb.edu.au
-- Alice Goodman, _Nixon in China_. http://www.opoudjis.net