From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Sat Oct 05 13:07:23 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_2_0); 5 Oct 2002 20:07:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 93175 invoked from network); 5 Oct 2002 20:07:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m14.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 Oct 2002 20:07:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Oct 2002 20:07:23 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 17xvGK-0008Bx-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Sat, 05 Oct 2002 13:10:56 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17xvFm-0008BU-00; Sat, 05 Oct 2002 13:10:22 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sat, 05 Oct 2002 13:10:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailbox-15.st1.spray.net ([212.78.202.115]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17xvFj-00089X-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sat, 05 Oct 2002 13:10:19 -0700 Received: from oemcomputer (host213-121-69-8.surfport24.v21.co.uk [213.121.69.8]) by mailbox-15.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 279C720249 for ; Sat, 5 Oct 2002 22:06:12 +0200 (DST) To: Subject: [lojban] Re: a new kind of fundamentalism Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 21:07:51 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20021005112031.G26784@miranda.org> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 X-archive-position: 1933 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: "And Rosta" Reply-To: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122260811 X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin Jay: > A constant state of change is *unacceptable* if the number of users of > the language is to increase. There's unanimity about that. > There is no reason or need for people to run around changing Lojban. There's reason to run around changing Lojban, and there's reason to not run around changing Lojban. I agree that brand recognition matters much more for an unchanging version trying to attract learners. > People who want to change things, rather > than work out problems with ill-defined portions of Lojban, should go > play with Lojban2 or Andban or something, using Lojban as a base, but > not calling it 'Lojban'. The name is of no consequence to those parties, > but 'brand recognition' is key to growing the speaker base. I agree. Since the baseline was imposed, I have never tried to change the baseline -- at least not as far as I can recall. I've even said in several places that I'm opposed to officially changing the baseline. That's the weird thing: you keep on accusing me and my sort of crimes I don't think we're guilty of; or at least you keep protesting about them -- 'accuse' is perhaps too strong a term. (The chap who wanted to make Lojban hexadecimal was guilty of it, but he was a harmless loony.) I'm not being disingenuous: I can understand how some jboskepre could be perceived to be trying to change the language, but it would be a different argument to wish for jboske to cease lest it deter learners, and I don't think that would be in the best interests of Lojban. --And.