[lojban] Re: Loglan

[sbelknap <sbelknap@uic.edu>]

So, progress.

1. Nick, And, lojbab, and possibly others seem willing to include some sort of 
recognition of the Loglan roots of lojban. I rather like And's statement.
2. A Loglan-lojban word list seems possible given the apparent lack of 
objection by the CEO of TLI.
3. Some interesting differences in philosophy are evident between LLG and TLI
4. Some of the Loglan history of lojban may actually be relevant to current 
discussion of the baseline policy.

About this poaching business I can only express mystification. I just don't 
get it. I generally favor transparency of intellectual capital. I see no 
reason why LLG should be unwilling to share their membership list with TLI. 
Why not? I consider it extraordinarily unlikely that such an exchange would 
harm the vitality of either group. Seems like a win-win to me. Would an 
exchange of membership lists between the two groups be considered less 
objectionable? What about TLI conveying LLG's invitation to the TLI 
membership? Perhaps there are issues I don't understand.

-Steven