Re: [lojban] Re: Official Statement- LLG Board approves new baselinepolicy

[Invent Yourself <xod@thestonecutters.net>]

On Sun, 1 Dec 2002, Steven Belknap wrote:

> On Saturday, November 30, 2002, at 08:07  PM, Invent Yourself wrote:
>
> > Are you suggesting that the toggle be incorporated into the official
> > ma'oste in order to bribe the remaining five Loglan people -- none of
> > whom
> > have even asked for this cmavo -- into learning Lojban?
>
> What?! You think that there are only five Loglan people who might be
> interested in lojban? That explains your idiotic remarks, I suppose. I
> personally know more than thirty persons who were interested in Loglan
> at one time or another, but are not at all active in lojban. I have
> been interested in Loglan since the mid 1970s when I first read JCB's
> Scientific American article, which my father had in his library. I
> started a Loglan club in my high school. I have seen copies of the
> Loglan books in the offices of a linguistics professors and an IBM
> programmer. There are some Loglan sleeper cells and singletons out
> there who have been waiting for lojban for decades, though perhaps they
> don't know it.


For thirty people "at one time or another" since the mid 70s, I was being
gracious by granting you even five still interested today.

You may have expected your flames to distract me from my point, but
they're not going to. Answer this: how relevant is this toggle cmavo to
the scads of "sleeper Lojbanists"? Because you aren't talking about
outreach and friendliness, you're talking about altering our baseline
documents to pander to a constituency I doubt even exists.


-- 
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.