On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 8:02 AM, selpa'i
<seladwa@gmx.de> wrote:
la .van. cu cusku di'e
On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 02:20:21PM +0200, selpa'i wrote:
la .lojbab. cu cusku di'e
But that isn't the case for Lojban.
You seem to be alone in thinking that (see other people's responses).
Hold it right there. He's definitely not. It's just that some people
who produce most noise - not judging whether this is good or bad - on this list
oppose it. That doesn't mean nobody else has the same opinion.
Then they should speak up and add to the discussion. If, in discussion X, something gets decided, then person Y that never cared to participate in discussion X should not complain about the outcome. In other words, if you want your opinion to be heard, then let it be heard. Otherwise it can be asumed you don't have an opinion or don't have an interest in the outcome of the discussion.
Seeing as how this discussion is about changing something in a language which is not currently allowed to be changed, it's entirely possible that those of use who disagree with your opinion that Lojban should be changed to conform to your viewpoint merely don't wish to waste their time arguing about something that has no effect on the language.
As .lojbab. shows quite clearly, your treatment of names in Lojban is /not/ how names are treated by the grammar. Which means you are either wrong and pigheaded, or you are trying to propose a change to the grammar of a language that is not currently allowed to be changed. In either case, it is my opinion that you are wasting your breath. Nothing will be "decided" by this conversation that has any effect on the functioning of Lojban.