Re: [lojban] An opinion against Lojban/Loglan

[Remo Dentato <rdentato@gmail.com>]

I stopped reading at:

> I don't consider either Loglan or Lojban viable auxlangs.

Neither do I, so I can't see how this could support any furhter argument.

Anyway, I quickly browsed the rest.

If I understood correctly, the author would have created a spin-off of
Loglan in a different way and his way would have been much better than
Lojban.

The problem is that he didn't.

I'll be very interested in his effort, I hope he will let us know when
he has completed his equivlent of CLL so we can compare the two
languages.

remod

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.