From xod@thestonecutters.net Sun Dec 01 10:03:56 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 1 Dec 2002 18:03:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 33746 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 18:01:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Dec 2002 18:01:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 18:01:59 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18IYPn-0006wa-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 10:01:59 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18IYPh-0006wJ-00; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 10:01:53 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 01 Dec 2002 10:01:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from [66.111.194.10] (helo=granite.thestonecutters.net) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18IYPZ-0006w7-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 10:01:45 -0800 Received: from localhost (xod@localhost) by granite.thestonecutters.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gB1I16m51646; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 13:01:06 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from xod@thestonecutters.net) Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 13:01:06 -0500 (EST) To: Steven Belknap Cc: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Official Statement- LLG Board approves new baseline policy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20021201125443.T51606-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 2812 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: xod@thestonecutters.net Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: Invent Yourself Reply-To: xod@thestonecutters.net X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=110189215 X-Yahoo-Profile: throwing_back_the_apple On Sun, 1 Dec 2002, Steven Belknap wrote: > On Saturday, November 30, 2002, at 08:07 PM, Invent Yourself wrote: > > > Are you suggesting that the toggle be incorporated into the official > > ma'oste in order to bribe the remaining five Loglan people -- none of > > whom > > have even asked for this cmavo -- into learning Lojban? > > What?! You think that there are only five Loglan people who might be > interested in lojban? That explains your idiotic remarks, I suppose. I > personally know more than thirty persons who were interested in Loglan > at one time or another, but are not at all active in lojban. I have > been interested in Loglan since the mid 1970s when I first read JCB's > Scientific American article, which my father had in his library. I > started a Loglan club in my high school. I have seen copies of the > Loglan books in the offices of a linguistics professors and an IBM > programmer. There are some Loglan sleeper cells and singletons out > there who have been waiting for lojban for decades, though perhaps they > don't know it. For thirty people "at one time or another" since the mid 70s, I was being gracious by granting you even five still interested today. You may have expected your flames to distract me from my point, but they're not going to. Answer this: how relevant is this toggle cmavo to the scads of "sleeper Lojbanists"? Because you aren't talking about outreach and friendliness, you're talking about altering our baseline documents to pander to a constituency I doubt even exists. -- Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.