From lojban-out@lojban.org Sat Oct 05 13:23:46 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 20:23:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 23210 invoked from network); 5 Oct 2002 20:23:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 Oct 2002 20:23:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Oct 2002 20:23:46 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 17xvWB-0008NE-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Sat, 05 Oct 2002 13:27:19 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17xvVO-0008Lq-00; Sat, 05 Oct 2002 13:26:30 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sat, 05 Oct 2002 13:26:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from miranda.org ([209.58.150.153] ident=qmailr) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.05) id 17xvVK-0008Lf-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sat, 05 Oct 2002 13:26:26 -0700 Received: (qmail 3135 invoked by uid 534); 5 Oct 2002 20:22:51 -0000 Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 14:22:51 -0600 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: a new kind of fundamentalism Message-ID: <20021005142251.I26784@miranda.org> References: <20021005112031.G26784@miranda.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: ; from a.rosta@lycos.co.uk on Sat, Oct 05, 2002 at 09:07:51PM +0100 X-archive-position: 1936 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jkominek@miranda.org Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: Jay F Kominek From: Jay F Kominek Reply-To: jkominek@miranda.org X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out On Sat, Oct 05, 2002 at 09:07:51PM +0100, And Rosta wrote: > > 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. "I am in favour of anything that subverts the baseline" - You. Er, could I trouble you to reconcile that? Whether or not the change is official doesn't matter. People also have to be _using_ the baseline version of Lojban. Using something else and calling it Lojban is no good. If they're using baseline Lojban, plus some suspicious stuff in the undefined areas of Lojban, well, you can't really complain about that, either, as they don't have a whole lot of choice. > 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. > 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. I'll admit to accusing you of doing things which will appear to most people as tinkering of some sort or another. Whether or not you actually are, sadly, is beside my point. Whatever it is you're doing, you said you're willing to do it on jboske. If you actually go through with that, I'm more or less out of things to complain about. Its a matter, I think, (whether or not I've made this clear in the past) of keeping one's dirty laundry out of public view. -- Jay Kominek The grass is always greener, On the other side of the dimensional barrier.