RE: [lojban] Re: BPFK phpbb

["And Rosta" <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>]

Robert LeChevalier:
> At 03:20 PM 4/28/03 -0400, xod wrote:
> >Whatever. I'll answer you on jboske after everyone joins, or after
> >everyone agrees to Yet Another Forum, and we all sign up to THAT one 
> 
> It isn't a jboske issue at the level we are posting. Nor is it really a 
> byfy internal issue: the community needs to know what the byfy is doing and 
> how we are doing it (at the general level, and to show that we are sticking 
> to the job set forth in the baseline policy statement) and have confidence 
> that language stability is being strongly supported 
> 
> jboske can discuss technical details of whatever it wants. Most 
> Lojbanists, possibly including most byfy-ists, aren't interested in 
> discussing changes to the language, but rather in clearly understanding 
> what the language IS 

Jboske is constituted to discuss technical details of Lojban, because
it annoyed the average subscriber to this list to have it swamped by
technical discussion.

The BF is going to be pretty farcical if participants can't even agree on
a forum in which to conduct its discussions.

--And.

From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Tue Apr 29 17:20:45 2003
Return-Path: <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>
X-Sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_6_6); 30 Apr 2003 00:20:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 57440 invoked from network); 30 Apr 2003 00:20:45 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216)
  by m14.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 30 Apr 2003 00:20:45 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lmsmtp01.st1.spray.net) (212.78.202.111)
  by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 30 Apr 2003 00:20:45 -0000
Received: from oemcomputer (host213-121-68-120.surfport24.v21.co.uk [213.121.68.120])
  by lmsmtp01.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E644C1E781
  for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Wed, 30 Apr 2003 02:20:42 +0200 (MEST)
To: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [lojban] Re: BPFK phpbb
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 01:20:40 +0100
Message-ID: <LPBBJKMNINKHACNDIIGMGEBBHPAA.a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030428211932.0390b9f0@pop.east.cox.net>
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
Importance: Normal
From: "And Rosta" <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122260811
X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin

Robert LeChevalier:
> At 03:20 PM 4/28/03 -0400, xod wrote:
> >Whatever. I'll answer you on jboske after everyone joins, or after
> >everyone agrees to Yet Another Forum, and we all sign up to THAT one 
> 
> It isn't a jboske issue at the level we are posting. Nor is it really a 
> byfy internal issue: the community needs to know what the byfy is doing and 
> how we are doing it (at the general level, and to show that we are sticking 
> to the job set forth in the baseline policy statement) and have confidence 
> that language stability is being strongly supported 
> 
> jboske can discuss technical details of whatever it wants. Most 
> Lojbanists, possibly including most byfy-ists, aren't interested in 
> discussing changes to the language, but rather in clearly understanding 
> what the language IS 

Jboske is constituted to discuss technical details of Lojban, because
it annoyed the average subscriber to this list to have it swamped by
technical discussion.

The BF is going to be pretty farcical if participants can't even agree on
a forum in which to conduct its discussions.

--And.