Subject: [lojban] Re: New poll for lojban

From: Jordan DeLong <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 00:26:09 -0600

[ Cc to [email-masked]; I can't vote through yahoo, so
apparently Robin'll get this message twice ;) ]

On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 04:33:44AM -0000, [email-masked] wrote:
> Do you support the new Lojban baseline 
> policy statement posted to the list and 

[ I never saw it posted to the list... ]

> found at 
> http://www.lojban.org/llg/baseline.html?

I vote yes, as this appears to be structured to allow clarification,
etc, with minimal impact on stability.

The various contradictions in baselined documents (and there aren't
really very many of these (contradictions or documents, heh heh),
but long-distance vo'a and such things could certainly use an
official stamp) are worth sorting out, and there are probably one
or two things worth considering for official status (mu'ei, official
statement that sumtcita quantifier scope goes from the sumti to the
tag, maybe a few other minor things), along with getting more verbose
definitions.

I'd also like to get on the mailing list for byfy stuff whenever
that gets set up.

mu'o
-- 
Jordan DeLong - [email-masked]
lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u
sei la mark. tuen. cusku