Re: lojban newbie: an outsider looking in

[Chris Double <chris@double.co.nz>]

>   First of all, the written materials. As far as I can tell,
> www.lojban.org hasn't been updated in about a year.  Should I trust
> it?

As far as I know it hasn't been updated because there has not been
much to update. Most things on it are still quite valid, apart from as
you point at the expected completion dates of things like the dictionary.

> I mean, the textbook is on hold until the dictionary comes out.. But
> the dictionary is expected in late 1997! Was the dictionary ever
> finished? If not, who's working on it?

No dictionary has been published as far as I'm aware. There is a nice
.pdf file at http://www.rrbcurnow.freeuk.com/lojban/index.html that I
use that serves as a good stand in. It lists gismu, rafsi, cmavo, etc
along with an english to gismu listing.

Another good place to look for information and links is
http://www.pdmi.ras.ru/~sklyanin/lojban.html.

>   LogFlash: Um.. I downloaded this. I ran it. It made me cry. :)

I quite like it. It works for its intended purpose and is quite
functional. My large, large dropback lists tend to be a problem for me
though :-).

One thing I dislike is the repetitive typing. I get aching hands (OOS,
RSI or whatever) with constant keyboard use and the typing in of the
corrections aggravates things. But it is an effective rote learning
tool. 

> I'm a web programmer by trade, and also have quite a bit of
> experience with tutoring and accelerated learning methods.. I'd be
> more than happy to lead a project to revamp the software. Would
> anybody else be interested in this? Where could I get the legacy
> code?

I'd use it if it was available. Particularly if there was some sort of
'honesty' system, where I didn't have to type in the answer, rather I
could guess the answer silently and confirm whether I was right. The
less keyboard use the better for me. I've used Flash!, a flashcard
program on the Palm Pilot, which does this and it works quite well.

> 
>   Finally: is the flag/logo really working? I hunted it down to put on
> the lojban website that I'm making... And decided against it. 

It looks good printed on the cover of the reference grammer IMHO. In
fact, the reference grammer is a damn fine book both in usefulness and
in quality. 

Perhaps it's the bitmap quality or the way it appears on a web page
that's the problem?

Chris.