[lojban] Re: a new kind of fundamentalism

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

Jay:
> A constant state of change is *unacceptable* if the number of users of
> the language is to increase. 

There's unanimity about that.

> There is no reason or need for people to run around changing Lojban. 

There's reason to run around changing Lojban, and there's reason to
not run around changing Lojban. I agree that brand recognition matters
much more for an unchanging version trying to attract learners.

> People who want to change things, rather
> than work out problems with ill-defined portions of Lojban, should go
> play with Lojban2 or Andban or something, using Lojban as a base, but
> not calling it 'Lojban'. The name is of no consequence to those parties,
> but 'brand recognition' is key to growing the speaker base.

I agree. Since the baseline was imposed, I have never tried to change
the baseline -- at least not as far as I can recall. I've even said
in several places that I'm opposed to officially changing the baseline.

That's the weird thing: you keep on accusing me and my sort of crimes
I don't think we're guilty of; or at least you keep protesting about
them -- 'accuse' is perhaps too strong a term. (The chap who wanted to 
make Lojban hexadecimal was guilty of it, but he was a harmless loony.) 
I'm not being disingenuous: I can understand how some jboskepre
could be perceived to be trying to change the language, but it
would be a different argument to wish for jboske to cease lest it
deter learners, and I don't think that would be in the best interests
of Lojban.

--And.