Re: META : Who is everyone (and what are they saying)

["G. Dyke" <gordon.dyke@bluewin.ch>]

la. rab.spir. cusku di'e

<I'm also working on getting good at Lojban for another reason: I'm taking a
course in school called "History and Structure of Language" (which is
basically
about linguistics). For a semester project in which the assignment is to
research a topic and then give a 45-minute presentation about it, I plan to
teach the class a bit of Lojban. High-schoolers might be a tough audience,
but
at least they're there because they're interested in language. I plan to
spend
lots of time on cmene in that presentation.>

Sounds interesting, maybe you could share the outline of your presentation
with us.

<It seems that xod deliberately makes himself difficult to refer to, with
the
strange names he gives himself. (At one point I referred to him whimsically
as
{la kokofintis.}) "xod" gives us a nice, concise way to refer to him, even
if
it confuses the heck out of newbies (sorry).>

Reminds me of a set of limeriks:

There was a young man who said xod.
must find it exceedingly odd
if you think that this tree ceases to be
when theres noone about in the quad

to which the reply was:

Young man your reasoning's odd
I'm always about in the quad
which is why the tree will continue to be
since observed by yours faithfully, xod.

(of course it was "God" in the original)

la xod. cusku di'e

<> I figured it out from the fact that all the things attributed to "xod",
if I
> searched my inbox, turned out to be from "Invent Yourself" - where does
that
> name come from, anyway?

It's good advice, don't you think?>

Nice rhetorical question to hide the fact that you *still* aren't saying
what xod. means...

cu'u la kreig.

<I'm actually wondering if we need a new gismu (WARNING: SARCASM AHEAD):
"besto" - x1 is an asbestos suit (metaphorically) worn by x2 over e-mail x3,
disagreed with by x4 for obvious reason x5>

for obvious reason??

But you know, if you think about it there are loads of gismu that would then
be needed:

"nidja" x1 is the knee-jerk reaction of x2 with purpose the destruction of
besto x3 when besto x4 proves unsufficient for reason x5

cu'u la and.

[Mind you, nonshadowiness of net identities is an illusion, because on the
occasions when I've met net pals in the flesh it's been a big shock, and it
likewise is, when say, I discover Rob was born in 1983 (how is it physically
*possible* for someone to have been born so recently and not be a babe in
arms!). And Nick, when he met me was surprised to find I wasn't quite the
cantankerous old curmudgeonly git he'd supposed me to be -- for one thing, I
was younger than he'd thought...]

Even lojban (albeit after a rather long incubation period) was born later
than rob, craig and me (and others... tsali for instance), maybe *you*
aren't as young as you were yesterday (that's true of most of us ;-)

As I'm deleting loads of stuff from the digest, I couldn't resist leaving
this for those who abandoned And's post a little too early:

<
As opposed to the small minority that speaks for itself
with glorious incessance.

--And.
>

How do you guys who *do* work manage to keep your jobs?

cu'u la pycyn

<
In general? Well, I do try to do the best I can with whatever position I get
dealt, so, if you aren't good at arguing -- or are more involved in
egotripping than working out a sensible positiona and defending it -- then
it
can be a rough experience.  After all, I have been working with this process
professionally since 1957, which gives me a leg up (and a lot of background
in dirty tricks if all else fails).  >

Oh! I'd best watch my step: either I argue too well and get nidja (le nidja
be la pycyn. fu lenu ri jinga djica) or I get written off as a hopeless
student of '85 %^>

mi'e greg.