Subject: [lojban] Re: Loglan

From: Invent Yourself <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 19:19:39 -0500 (EST)

On Sun, 1 Dec 2002, Steven Belknap wrote:

> If old Loglan people read your posts they will hardly feel welcome.

I'm not so sure Santa Claus is too happy with my writing either. I'm
nervously predicting a lump of coal in my sock this year, so I fear Santa
more than your phantom Loglanist lurkers who refuse to announce their
presence year after year, yet for whom we should edit not only our posts,
but our core baseline documents.

> I estimate that there are about 500 people with some degree of
> familiarity with Loglan who might be interested in lojban. Since most of
> them have never heard of lojban, they are unlikely to join the lojban
> community. I believe it is prudent to obtain contact information for
> these people and invite them into the lojban community.

Perhaps you'd like to volunteer to ask the TLI for their mailing list. I'm
sure they'll hand over their user base to us, seeing as how they're not
really using it.

> > So this discussion is logically null. You want to patch over the
> > schism, but you claim to realize that there is in fact no way to merge
> > the two languages, making the idea of schism resolution is
> > meaningless. You argue vociferously in the interest of an invisible,
> > silent population -- Loglanists who now have a new interest in Lojban.
> > You have argued for but then de-emphasized that toggle cmavo. You have
> > complained about your lost Loglan efforts, but then claimed to have
> > forgotten most of your Loglan anyway. And you want to convince newbies
> > of the changelessness of Lojban by offering to change it for them.
>
> Maybe you ought to switch to decaf.

Try posting other than such this tangled mess of non sequiturs, shifting
goals, outright contradictions, and cheap shots, and I won't be driven to
drink!

-- 
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.