From rob@twcny.rr.com Thu Sep 20 13:46:46 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rob@twcny.rr.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2_2); 20 Sep 2001 20:46:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 84145 invoked from network); 20 Sep 2001 20:46:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by 10.1.1.220 with QMQP; 20 Sep 2001 20:46:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailout6.nyroc.rr.com) (24.92.226.125) by mta3 with SMTP; 20 Sep 2001 20:46:45 -0000 Received: from mail1.twcny.rr.com (mail1-1 [24.92.226.139]) by mailout6.nyroc.rr.com (8.11.6/Road Runner 1.12) with ESMTP id f8KKjiH07302 for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 16:45:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from riff ([24.92.246.4]) by mail1.twcny.rr.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-59787U250000L250000S0V35) with ESMTP id com for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 16:45:44 -0400 Received: from rob by riff with local (Exim 3.32 #1 (Debian)) id 15kAi9-0001pg-00 for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 16:46:17 -0400 Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 16:46:17 -0400 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] META : Who is everyone (and what are they saying) Message-ID: <20010920164617.B810@twcny.rr.com> Reply-To: rob@twcny.rr.com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.20i X-Is-It-Not-Nifty: www.sluggy.com From: Rob Speer On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 12:31:04PM +0100, And Rosta wrote: > >>> "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" 09/19/01 11:43pm >>> > This is quite a radical change. Some of those may have been learnt and > used already. I doubt that our conservative constituency would stand > for it. I'd be fascinated to see an instance where "tei...foi" or "lau" were used (in actual usage, not discussions of useless cmavo). However, reading old issues of ju'i lobypli, I saw the issue where all sorts of lerfu cmavo were proposed. In fact, someone wanted to set aside an entire consonant of cmavo-space for miscellaneous characters or accents! Where did these people get the idea that spelling bees for, say, French words would be held in Lojban? And why did people pay so much attention to making Lojban able to describe any conceivable alphabet and none to the subjunctive? -- la rab.spir noi sarji lo'u lu ganai li'u le'u