From xod@thestonecutters.net Sat Dec 07 08:14:29 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 7 Dec 2002 16:14:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 8269 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 16:14:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 7 Dec 2002 16:14:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 16:14:29 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18Khb2-0004OC-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 08:14:28 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18Khay-0004Ns-00; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 08:14:24 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sat, 07 Dec 2002 08:14:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from [66.111.194.10] (helo=granite.thestonecutters.net) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18Khaq-0004LN-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 08:14:16 -0800 Received: from localhost (xod@localhost) by granite.thestonecutters.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gB7GDlc91656 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 11:13:47 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from xod@thestonecutters.net) Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 11:13:47 -0500 (EST) To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: "2moi" crap (was Re: Aesthetics) In-Reply-To: <20021207160713.GB11095@allusion.net> Message-ID: <20021207110336.X91480-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 3218 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 Sat, 7 Dec 2002, Jordan DeLong wrote: > > That's just cause you haven't internalized the numbers yet. Rest assured, > > science and the accounting books in "Lojbanistan" are not done with two- > > and three-letter numerical cmavo. > > Yes I have internalized the numbers; that's the problem. I've been > speaking english for many years. I prefer consistency than the employment of arbitrary devices to aid beginners. Perhaps in another year or two, you will have internalized the Lojban numbers. > Note, however, that I mind things like "li 12312.0012" far less > than this "2moi" crap. The former is truely for what you > claim---shorting things when writing them because we're dealing > with long numbers. The latter is just lame; "re" is not harder to > write than "2", and it is *much* easier to read. > > No one will ever need to write "12312.0012moi" That's an absurd claim, unless you're referring to the decimal point. People will indeed need to write 83629553moi. Where will your arbitrary threshold be? Under no conditions are cmavo shorter than digits. -- Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.