[lojban] Re: Nick will be with you shortly

[Jim Carter <jimc@MATH.UCLA.EDU>]

On Wed, 26 Feb 2003, Jordan DeLong wrote:
--- snip prior history ---
> > > There is no problem with loi.
> >
> > Since more than one competent lojbanist disagrees with you, you are
> > prima facia wrong, even if all your points are correct.
>
> Huh?  This is a fallacy (argumentum ad populum).  Statements have
> a particular truth value regardless of what we believe about them.

Also regardless of what _you_ believe about them.  But the _*TRVTH*_ is
hard to discover.  In the usual case, people disagree what the truth is,
and when the disagreement impairs function (in this case, use of loi),
there is a problem -- in peoples' understanding of the rules, whether or
not, if they were diligent enough in studying them, the rules were without
fault (not very likely).

A recurring theme these days seems to be "I know what's right and I'll nuke
your immoral arse if you get in my way".  Not accusing you (Jordan) of
being quite that extreme, but in a standardization process, consensus is
equally as important as technical correctness.  Lack of consensus does
impair function, and is a problem that needs to be solved.

James F. Carter          Voice 310 825 2897    FAX 310 206 6673
UCLA-Mathnet;  6115 MSA; 405 Hilgard Ave.; Los Angeles, CA, USA  90095-1555
Email: jimc@math.ucla.edu    http://www.math.ucla.edu/~jimc (q.v. for PGP key)