Bob:
I think the active hostility to LLG by TLI died with JCB. I made
it one of my conditions for accepting to be CEO of TLI that I would
cooperate with LLG, which was accepted by the Trustees. There
is no objection on my part to preparing a two-way dictionary. As
for the membership list, would LLG provide TLI with their membership
list so we could attempt to poach their members? I think not
Speaking just for myself, I think it would be great if a joint
statement from TLI and LLG was sent to members of both groups.
The statement could make it clear that each group wishes to be
welcoming to the other (etc. etc.), and could perhaps also give an
honest appraisal of the current situation, which, as I see it, is
that as language designs the two are pretty much equivalent (and
hence can justly be seen as alternate incarnations of the same
underlying design), but in levels of active participation are
massively discrepant.