[lojban] Re: the ethics of the HTML content meta tag

[Robert LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org>]

At 11:29 PM 12/12/02 -0600, Steven Belknap wrote:
>On Thursday, December 12, 2002, at 04:22 PM, Theodore Reed wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:18:15 -0600
> > Steven Belknap <sbelknap@UIC.EDU> wrote:
> >> Judging by the posts to this list, some members of lojbanistan seem
> >> more than indifferent, they seem quite hostile towards logli and not
> >> just towards me. Such hostility seems as unwise as it is unkind.
> >
> > I have noticed no hostility to logli in this community. There is a
> > general "if you don't speak lojban, don't try telling us that we're
> > doing something wrong" attitude, which applies to logli and non-logli
> > alike, which may be related to what you're talking about.
>
>There is sometimes a world of difference between implication and
>inference. I assume you are aware that some of the leaders of
>lojbanistan are not at all fluent in LLG Loglan. Should their input be
>ignored?

At present, no.  But as one of those leaders, I will say that after the 
baseline is complete, then if I don't speak Lojban, I should have no say in 
how the language evolves.  So while we are not there yet, we are rapidly 
evolving towards that point.

Furthermore, it was in part BECAUSE I wanted the byfy baseline effort to be 
inclusive of the active lojban-using community, which remains a minority in 
the LLG voting membership and Board, that I supported a byfy that is 
independent of the official governance structure, other than in having its 
chair accountable to the Board, and the voting on the statement inclusive 
of the entire Lojban community, and not just the voting membership.  The 
new policy also envisions individual Lojbanists certified as being 
competent in Lojban usage setting the editorial and authorial standards of 
the future, so that Lojban as a language will be ever-more controlled by 
its speakers and not by LLG that justifiably has a role for non-Lojban 
speakers.

The last LogFest put me and the other "oldies" on notice that the community 
will not continue to provide us with respect merely for what we did 10-15 
years ago; they similarly feel no particular obligation to JCB, whose 
contribution to Lojban was even older.  What is important to them is what 
will benefit the language and the community NOW and in the FUTURE.  If we 
of the past wish to help lead in the future, we have to move into the 
future along with the new people as best we can, or we will be left behind.

>I think not. The unique experience of some TLI Loglan
>speakers, professional logicians, linguists, and others not fluent in
>LLG Loglan may be relevant and helpful.

Not after the baseline is complete.

>  Given the fact that most
>conlangs fail, it is best to cast ones net widely. If a person brings
>something valuable to the conversation, he should be given a hearing.

If he doesn't bring it in Lojban, then after the baseline is complete, the 
value of his contribution may not be considered.

lojbab

-- 
lojbab                                             lojbab@lojban.org
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA                    703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban:                 http://www.lojban.org



To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/