From sbelknap@UIC.EDU Wed Dec 04 18:10:11 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 5 Dec 2002 02:10:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 76293 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 02:10:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 Dec 2002 02:10:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 02:10:10 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18JlSs-0007Nn-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 18:10:10 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18JlSp-0007NW-00; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 18:10:07 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 04 Dec 2002 18:10:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from larch.cc.uic.edu ([128.248.155.164]) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.05) id 18JlSh-0007NE-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 18:09:59 -0800 Received: (qmail 27859 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 02:09:57 -0000 Received: from webmail.cc.uic.edu (HELO webmail.uic.edu) (128.248.121.50) by larch.cc.uic.edu with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 02:09:57 -0000 X-WebMail-UserID: sbelknap@uic.edu Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 20:09:29 -0600 To: lojban-list , rmcivor@macsrule.com X-EXP32-SerialNo: 50000146 Subject: [lojban] Re: Why we should cancel the vote or all vote NO (was RE: Official Statement- LLG Board approves new baseline policy Message-ID: <3DF448BF@webmail.uic.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis X-Mailer: InterChange (Hydra) SMTP v3.62 X-archive-position: 3039 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: sbelknap@uic.edu Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: sbelknap Reply-To: sbelknap@uic.edu X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=810567 >===== Original Message From rmcivor@macsrule.com ===== >On Mardi, d‚ce 3, 2002, at 08:30 US/Eastern, And Rosta wrote: > >> I have long suspected that JCB was so pissed off at you not just for >> splitting the language but for doing it with such poor taste and poor >> discernment (from his perspective, at least). I do think that the >> average person who knows neither language would, if faced with a >> page of Loglan and a page of Lojban, find the Loglan somewhat pleasing >> and the Lojban somewhat monstrous. Certainly my aesthetic judgements >> are thus. So your crime was not only apostasy but also perversion. >> > > Indeed this is a common reason for newbies to choose Loglan. The alternative lojban orthography may look more pleasing to those familiar with European languages. This seems silly to me. Loglan/lojban are both very strange languages. Loglan's superficial appearance of familiarity is highly misleading.