Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: word for "www" (was: Archive location.)

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 21:40:53 EDT

In a message dated 9/11/2002 5:59:43 PM Central Daylight Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

<<
> > > It is not the case that the whole point of lujvo is that someone
> > > > should be able to dissect them and figure out what you mean. The 
> whole
> > > > point of lujvo is that they are words formed from parts that have
> > > > independent meaning within Lojban, but with a meaning that is not
> > > > equivalent to the sum of their parts. Their dissectablity is not 
> their
> > > > point.
> > > 
> > > OK. What is their point?
> > >>
> > Now who is being deliberately obtuse?
> 
> Obtuse, maybe. Deliberately, no.
<<
Urr Umm, as the saying goes. Note that the answer to the question starts in 
the second line of the pargraph you are responding to and that it is repeated 
in And's response, at which later point, you concede it as though it were 
new. In short just about exactly others' flaws that led you to call them 
deliberately obtuse.
You can appreciate my confusion, no doubt.