Subject: Re: [lojban] corrigible vlaste? RE: Re: I like chocolate

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2002 13:07:01 EDT

In a message dated 9/21/2002 8:48:59 AM Central Daylight Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

<<
> The experimental gismu are silly, but the experimental cmavo aren't.
> All the experimental cmavo suggested by me are serious. Most are
> brainstormed ideas that deserve to be rejected, but some make a great
> improvement to Lojban.
> >>
Well, your entitled to think so (and presumably do if you've gone to the 
trouble to present them), but I haven't seen a cse that convincesme nor one 
that clearly can't be handled in Lojban as is (though just how may be less 
clear). I don't suppose you invent a new word every time your ingenuity 
fails you in finding the right way to say something (at least partly because 
you don't engage in that search often -- if at all), but others do and I 
dislike encoruaging it.

<<
Anyway, what is this notion of 'LLG-compliance'? You may know something
I don't, but to me it's rubbish to suggest that the LLG tries to
prevent discussion of how Lojban could be improved. Indeed, that
would go against its very founding principles (that see Loglans as
an instrument of linguistic research).
I take this to mean no more than that LLG would object to someone passing off 
as possicial Lojban something that is not in conformity with the baseline. 
Minimally, a blanket statement that nothing in various places is to count as 
official Lojban -- the language to be learned -- but what bears the stamp. 
Once a person is moderately good at the official language as a base, he can 
go hog wild for his own and others' amusement and so on. But he can't 
complain if people refuse to understand what he says that is outside the 
baseline. 

<<
I think that if the Wiki were officially associated with the LLG
(in fact, is it not now an official LLG project, as listed at
lojban.org?), nothing about it would change.
If it is an official LLG project, it is committed to maintaining the baseline 
for Lojban, which I take to mean nothing more than that places whee 
deviations may occur are labelled as such. In this case, I suspect the whole 
is -- at least implicitly -- labelled and some pages are explicitly so: 
"What's wrong with baselined Lojban" with various degrees of specificity).