RE: [lojban] Re: BPFK

["M@" <matthew.dunlap@gmail.com>]

I'm a programmer, just let me know what I can do, I'm here to help.

--teryret

-----Original Message-----
From: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org [mailto:lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org]
On Behalf Of Matt Arnold
Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 1:47 PM
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban] Re: BPFK

I am the place to send issues, positions, and arguments for the time
being, and I will make sure they get where they need to go. I want to
assemble the programmers willing to take up the code that has been
written so far and bring it to completion. I'll build requirements
demos as necessary. I'm not a programmer, but I'm willing to drive
this project.

-Eppcott

On 12/20/06, John E Clifford <clifford-j@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> This is -- and always has been -- a great idfea.  Alas, the site given and
those dependent from it
> seem to say that it is still just an idea, wiithout anything like
implementation.  the last dated
> word there is three years (and change) ago. Is there an actual place (as
your offer of help
> suggests) to send issues, positions and arguments?  If so, where?  If not,
what remains to be
> done?
>
> --- Matt Arnold <matt.mattarn@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I have recently accepted the job of jatna for the baupla fuzykamni
> > (Language Definition Committee). I've been interviewing BPFK members a
> > lot in the past few days. The problems of BPFK are not at all that the
> > commissioners are lazy! They care about it. The lack of work stems
> > largely from disincentives.
> >
> > #1 Few of them are willing to be thorough on a document that won't
> > pass, because that work is seen as going to waste. They don't know the
> > likelihood that this will happen because they can't predict the
> > political will of the community.
> >
> > #2 Several of them don't want to participate in a debate that will be
> > meaningless because the process is weighted in favor of yes votes.
> > They are weighted in favor of yes votes in order to have momentum and
> > move out of doldrums. But a lot of the doldrum is due to these two
> > disincentives!
> >
> > The solution is to know the overall political will of the community,
> > and to have a browsable, accessible map of the various positions so
> > that one's effort at debate won't vanish uselessly into the mists of
> > history.  That system has been called an Elephant. For those who are
> > not familiar, please go here for a description:
> > http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Elephant
> >
> > I believe BPFK work needs to be building a Document of Record on the
> > range of expert positions on the issues and the pro and con arguments.
> > Most Lojban enthusiasts will agree a well-defined language (or
> > "debugging", if you will) should be the single most urgent step in the
> > Lojban language project so that all other projects can go forward with
> > confidence of having a firmer foundation. Toward that end, the
> > completion and implementation of the Elephant is the Manhattan
> > Project, the most single urgently-needed tool.
> >
> > I will be happy to take people's positions, sign up on the Elephant
> > with their identity on their behalf, and copy and paste their
> > contributions if they don't want to learn a new system.
> >
> > Please step forward if you have software skills.
> >
> > -Eppcott
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
lojban-list-request@lojban.org
> > with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or
if
> > you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.
> >
> >
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
> with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
> you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.
>
>


To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.