Thanks for those links. In reading this interesting thread, I find myself perplexed as to what it is that the Progressive Lojbanists want, that leads to this ire, bitterness or disillusionment. I understand the Conservative Lojbanist position, and also Radical positions, such as remedying all the remediable defects of Lojban, which then yields Toaq. But what is the rationale for the intermediate position? I understand that there was a flowering of dialects, but while all surely improved Base Lojban, surely none improved Lojban to the point of adequacy. And if, for some reason that I don't understand, the Conservative control of LLG was a problem, why did the Progressives not join LLG and vote out the Conservative leadership?
My best guess as to the reason for ire, bitterness or disillusionment is that prior to the development of Toaq and not-yet-created loglangological conspectuses, the typical loglanger would discover Lojban, become deeply immersed in it (even, in some extreme cases, reading the proceedings of the Jboske and Lojban list archives many years after they took place!), then notice more and more flaws, and then gradually come to realization of the irreparability of Lojban, but only after investing thousands upon thousands of hours of largely wasted effort, this wasted effort being the cause of ire, bitterness or disillusionment. But this still doesn't explain why ill-feelings would be directed at Lojbanic Conservatism, since the irreparability of Lojban is due to the design of Lojban itself, not to Conservatism.
Or maybe the apparent existence of irate, bitter or disillusioned Progressives is just an illusion produced by this thread?
--And.