On 29 Sep 2014 12:23, "TR NS" <transfire@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Monday, September 29, 2014 5:39:54 AM UTC-4, And Rosta wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 29 Sep 2014 09:59, "TR NS" <tran...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Monday, September 29, 2014 4:24:47 AM UTC-4, And Rosta wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 29 Sep 2014 04:45, "TR NS" <tran...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> That is a different proposal than the one for using /voi/ for {poi'i}, which is the one you hadn't understood.
>> >
>> >
>> > Wait, that's a different "new voi" proposal? And both proposed by la selpa'i?
>>
>> That's my impression. But the "as"-like voi is mooted just in a blog post, not in any list of formal proposals.
>
>
> "impression"? So you don't even know for sure? Can't you tell be reading the proposal?
I don't trust my judgement. There are aspects of Lojban I was never expert on, and in everything I am best rusty. I had largely tuned out for a dozen years; only recently has my interest been rekindled by a new wave of lojbanists, who know their shit.
>
>>
>> >>
>> >> It struck me as quite reasonable and understandable that you, newish to these topics, didn't understand that proposal, but not that you blamed the proposer for that.
>> >
>> > Am I reading that right? Instead of explaining, you are taking the time to rub my face in it?
>>
>> No, just to point out that the ethos and etiquette of the internet is that one takes it upon oneself to educate oneself as far as one can, and seeing that, others will be willing to give one a leg up to the areas one's independent understanding cannot reach. One cannot reasonably expect others to have prepackaged everything for one in easily digestible form.
>
>
> Then you shouldn't reasonably expect anyone to learn the language either.
I don't. I wouldn't recommend Lojban to anybody, unless they'd just get a kick out of learning it for the hell of it. Not everybody shares my view on that, but nobody expects new learners to follow and understand highly technical discussion.
I don't believe the ethos and etiquette of the internet is to answer an earnest request for explanation with, that's for us to know and you to figure out. I also don't think it is much to ask that proposals be explained with at least a smidgen of plain language. As a programmer I know the importance of writing good comments. I'd sink like a rock if I explained to my coworkers, you "cannot reasonably expect me to have prepackaged everything for you in easily digestible form."
As an academic I know that at a stage when you're thrashing ideas around exploratorily it would be exhausting and unreasonable to expect interlocutors to make that discussion intelligible to those who aren't already able to understand it. Once you get to the publication stage, you set yourselves much higher standards of perspicuity, but you're still entitled to assume a certain level of prior knowledge from your readers. Not every academic publication is a beginners' textbook.
--And.
--