My two cents on a well written argument (I say this up front before
blasting that argument):
Thank you. I was having some fun with your argument too, until I found it boiled down to something really quite simple.
I had thought the Lojban community was more one of rules than of personality. The arguments against lOkadin's style seem based on personal preferences and individuals' conjectures; not on the content of the CLL or any canon Lojban document.
Oh, and by the way:
> Colin Fine, a skilled Lojbanist, tried LOkadin's trick of writing without spaces back in 1992
That would have been GREAT information to *start* with!!! You have the benefit of knowing how a previous traveller down this path fared, lOkadin doesn't. Now, he knows that a respected Lojbanist (at least for a time) saw some value in the approach, too; that's probably good news for him. If he cares to research some history, he can learn more, rather than being sat on by the crowd.
Incidentally, I find the following pieces to be improper conduct in a place of rational debate:
As a broader principle, if a language and its usage responds to every
whim of fashion, then there are soon no standards for correctness.
That is a valid broader principle. However, this thread is not about "every whim", it is about one approach. It is invalid to use this as an underpinning argument against an individual approach.
At this point, change is a bad thing. Especially change merely for the
sake of doing something different.
Do you know that his motivation is so trivial as "merely for the sake of doing something different"? You belittle his motivations without understanding them. This type of implication on his character is underhanded and out of order.
Early Lojbanist Michael Helsem, a poet, got a reputation for writing...
His writing was useful mostly as a bad example
"A person wrote poor Lojban. Not many people read his work. He improved, then more people read his work."
That is the extent of the content of the above section, that is valid to the topic at hand. It is such a simple story, I doubt it needed be told, even to lOkadin. All it does is throw a negative tone on the thread which it has not earned, and put lOkadin in the shadow of the villified Helsem. If you have emotional baggage regarding Helsem, even if lOkadin reminds you of him, this is not the place to unload it.
LOkadin is not being nearly as avant garde
as he might think.
Did he claim to be avant-garde? Baselessly attributing unflattering motivations to your opponent is *very* poor debating style.
You can make good arguments without turning a conclusion into a premise, and without veiled insults. As an _expression_ of respect, I say you can rise above these rhetorical devices.
mi'e .xius.