On 9/17/2014 6:53 PM, mukti wrote:
On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 12:11:54 PM UTC-3, clifford wrote:
There was then a dearth of interesting problems for a while. I am
not sure that that one controversy and its two main participants
should be used to make any general claims about Lojban's popularity,
etc.
To be clear, I'm not trying to measure /popularity/ so much as /activity
/-- not how many people have been exposed to lojban or what their
sentiments are towards it, but rather, the extent to which people are
actively discussing and using lojban. For these purposes, an extended
debate about some aspect of lojban is a positive indicator. A lack of
"interesting problems" -- problems and/or interest -- registers as a
negative indication. (Disgusted silence would also count as a negative
-- it seems to me that it ought to!)
The problem is that "interesting problems" of the sort mentioned indicate a lot of activity by a very few people, but the activity itself drives other people away, especially when it a) look esoteric and B) seems to imply incompleteness of design.
I've always considered the more important number to be the number of "uniques"- different people who post (not subscribers but actual posters), as showing growth of the community and confidence on the part of new people that they can indeed contribute.
But I'm not sure how easy that is to measure on other-than mailing lists. lojbab -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.