From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Sun Dec 01 15:26:41 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 1 Dec 2002 23:26:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 87822 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 23:26:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Dec 2002 23:26:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lmsmtp04.st1.spray.net) (212.78.202.114) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 23:26:40 -0000 Received: from oemcomputer (host81-7-63-224.surfport24.v21.co.uk [81.7.63.224]) by lmsmtp04.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22D8947E89 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 00:26:39 +0100 (MET) To: Subject: RE: [lojban] Loglan Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 23:28:45 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20021201172713.03162550@pop.east.cox.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Importance: Normal From: "And Rosta" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122260811 X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin Lojbab: > From what I have gathered based on McIvor's comments to me, JCB would > oppose any sort of baseline. JCB would have agreed with And that the > language should just keep changing as people come up with new ideas. It > was the community that wanted a version of the language that (would be > official and) would stop changing. Hence the baseline policy that I came > up with in response to the couple dozen Loglanists who wrote to me write > after I started trying to get the Loglan community back together (which led > to Lojban) In the light of recent terminological clarifications, I gather that JCB and I would favour a baseline, but oppose a baseline freeze. The Naturalists, on the other hand, might oppose a baseline tout court, or at least see it as an irrelevance. --And.