[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[lojban] Re: Final nails in the coffin

Bob Slaughter wrote:

John E Clifford wrote:


...


Psst.  The curtain's down.  The show's over.


More for you than him.


Eh.  It's down.  We were both participants in the show.  The point is:
there's likely going to be no more dialogue between us (at least on this
issue).  That applies equally to both of us.
You see, John Clifford has been dealing with Loglan and Lojban longer *than you've likely been alive*. And he's provided valuable input 
over the years, contributing to the logical soundness of the language.


That's a lot of work.  Thank you, J.C., for your effort, and the value
you have contributed.

That really makes it all the more puzzling about his unfamiliarity of
the first page of the LLC, though.  Indeed, the front page of
www.lojban.org too! I wish I'd put that in the original 'nails' post, too. Ah well.
The best conclusion I can come to is that he was focusing in other areas of the language (and, at least recently, is not in touch with how Lojban is exposed to the world in general). But even someone focusing in a specialty should be aware of overarching concerns.
Yep, sometimes he's a pain in the arse old-fart, but he's earned that right from many of us.
Do you intend to exclude me from 'many of us'? I'm not going to stop him being whatever he wants to be! Or deny him the right, to do *anything*, other than waste my time. Did you think I was? Did you think I *could*? (Did you see the second-last sentence of my 'nails' post? FYI, it was "Oh well, it's your choice.") 


For reference, see
http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=John+Clifford&bl

>

... ['wild snippage']


Impressive.

A friend, just today actually, in an IM conversation, said "Always
mistrust authority".  When I expressed a little puzzlement at his
expression, he said he *is* an authority (leader of a team in his job),
and *still* believes in the statement, and that it holds for his
underlings as much as anyone. I haven't fully processed it yet, but I think I admire him for that.
(BTW, thanks - you've improved the strength of the kicker even further! A quick scan of the 37 links on the left side of the Web page you cited, shows 3 of them indicate cultural neutrality is a feature of Lojban. Perhaps J.C. needs your help in finding references to Lojban material, and to be more familiar with how *he* is exposed to the world in general, too.) 


Nor do I look forward to your next installment.


I don't look forward to any installment, really.

Regarding your choice of using the word 'your', in that sentence:  Did
you consider this one just gone by, more 'my' installment than J.S.'? Do you think he contributed less 'argument and rhetoric' than I did?
You may not have meant to, but I feel you come across as yet another newbie with the "I just discovered Lojban and I think it's really neat except for this ONE thing, and if you accept my change, then Lojban will be the GREATEST, and if not, then you all are a bunch of old lame losers" attitude. 

Hm.  Too bad you felt that way.  It must have been difficult to carry
that emotional baggage.

- I won't take responsibility for your feelings, though.  They're your own.
If your idea is sound (and it may well be; I suspect most people on this list are just ignoring your long-winded rants), 

Yes, I fully expect (indeed, hope) many ignored the bulk of that
interaction.

Again, regarding your choice of using the word 'your':  Do you mean to
imply that most (or even, some) people on this list would ignore my
posts and only pay attention to J.S.'?
you should be able to explain its merits in a few succinct paragraphs, except for perhaps answering a few questions here and there, which is inevitable. 

I have tried to explain its merits succinctly.  Indeed, my very first
post (which I didn't even post - thanks for your help Robin - and which was before rantage even had the possibility to get started) only had only six paragraphs, and only two of them longer than two lines. Have *you* been ignoring my posts (from the very beginning, indeed)? 

In case it was not succinct enough, here are two sentences from that
post (one abbreviated):
"The symbols of this alphabet indicate the sound they represent by their
shape."
"It is more than phonetic; is a ... categorical ordering of sounds."
(I have since learned how inappropriate 'phonetic' is, I hope to be
allowed the flexibility to replace the word with 'phonemic', and the
point and the meaning still stand.)

Look up my story about planet X and planet Y in the archives.  It is not
too ranty, nor too long.  It is not so much an explaination of the
merits, however; it was intended to be a jumping-off platform from which
a discussion about merits could proceed with a common vocabulary.  -
Even a couple of days ago, I realised that discussion was getting
nowhere without a shared context. I tried to fix that by providing one. J.C. entirely avoided answering the question I put at the end of the 
story.  If you wish to discuss the question, I'd be happy to start that
avenue of dialog. Do you think Xians are more impressed with Y-alphabet, or that Ysters are more impressed with X-alphabet? 

Read 'Alphabet gedankenexperiment'.  It's longer (and I tried to
transmogrify rantiness into humour), and again maybe not so much an
explaination of merits as an attempt to create a common environment in
which to debate corresponding points.  J.C. avoided answering the
question at the end of this one, too, with "Faulty analogy".  (Later, he
somehow manages to come up with 'Somone coming from the outside may find
it helpful' and still dismiss its value, in the same sentence, with a straight face - as if Lojbanists are born Lojbanists, I guess.) If you wish to discuss *this* question, I'd be happy to start *that* avenue of dialog as well or instead. Which scenario represents the lingust doing the 'best' job he can? 

I think I could find others, but those are the ones that stand out in my
memory - I hope three is enough, and not too many.
Then it would stand or fall on its merits, not on how loud its cheerleaders are. 

Good!

As you can see (if you want to), I have been more colloquial with other
participants of the mailing lists, and gotten more useful feedback
quicker.  I try to adapt the tone and style of my response to the person
I'm responding to.

How would you apply the term 'cheerleader' to the interactions between
me and J.C.?  One, or both of us?  If only one, is there a difference
you can point to?


And you missed one of Dr. Clifford's main points in your last wild snippage:
"As i have said, I don't have an opposing point of view (that featural alphabets are a bad idea); my only interest is to either get you to give a GOOD argument for you proposal or drop it. I have little hope for either happening based on past performance."
So what's the short-and-sweet version? What value would there be for the existing community, many of whom have spent years writing various bits of lojban in good old ASCII, to dump all the old corpus and tools, and start using your proposed alphabet? Would there be any advantage to new learners if we did so? 

That point has already been addressed, and so deserved snippage.  Don't
dump anything.  Make this an optional feature.  Matt Arnold's idea, from
a couple of days ago (which I happily signed up with). Go check. (Have you ignored him too?! What did he ever do to you?)
The weight of bias in your e-mail (4 direct points of comparison between J.C. and I: "More for you than him", "longer *than you've likely been alive*", "your next installment", "your long-winded rants", the shining character reference, and more indirect points), is dismaying. Almost... cheerleader-like. But I'm willing to put that aside if you choose to pick up one (or more!) of the legitimate avenues of argument. 

--
Good night, and have a rational tomorrow!

mi'e .xius.



To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.