From lojban-out@lojban.org Mon Dec 09 19:36:20 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 10 Dec 2002 03:36:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 8837 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 03:36:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 10 Dec 2002 03:36:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 03:36:20 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18LbC0-0007mD-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 19:36:20 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18LbBy-0007lu-00; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 19:36:18 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 09 Dec 2002 19:36:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com ([66.68.125.184] ident=root) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18LbBr-0007lR-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 19:36:12 -0800 Received: from cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (asdf@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id gBA3gaG9044481 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 21:42:37 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from fracture@cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com) Received: (from fracture@localhost) by cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id gBA3gY2b044476 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 21:42:34 -0600 (CST) Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 21:42:33 -0600 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] let's get rid of this lojban == loglan crap (was Re: tags) Message-ID: <20021210034233.GB44058@allusion.net> References: <3E04B1D8@webmail.uic.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="oC1+HKm2/end4ao3" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3E04B1D8@webmail.uic.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-archive-position: 3382 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: fracture@allusion.net Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: Jordan DeLong From: Jordan DeLong Reply-To: fracture@allusion.net X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out --oC1+HKm2/end4ao3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 05:45:16PM -0600, sbelknap wrote: [...] > I favor using Loglan, the English word for lojban, in all written=20 > communication about the language which is directed at an English audience= . The=20 > words lojbo, lojban, etc. should be prominently featured on the web site.= If=20 > lojban *is* Loglan, then lets reflect that in our written materials. I'm not a LLG member, so I can't official propose this for the next meeting (afaik). However, as a member of the community I would like to ask that at the next LLG meeting the "lojban is loglan" statement be considered for revokation. If the statement truely would be intended to describe what kind of conlang lojban is, we should make it "lojban is an engelang" or "lojban is a engineered language". However I think the LLG has no reason to have such a statement of the category of the language, so I would suggest that no new statement regarding this subject replace the old. --=20 Jordan DeLong - fracture@allusion.net lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u sei la mark. tuen. cusku --oC1+HKm2/end4ao3 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE99WKoDrrilS51AZ8RApnBAKDBfLqXGZvwsoir58O5zsHxPlR2LACgpkZ0 uO25UCsjbcokFJXWuW/ny2o= =tzCx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --oC1+HKm2/end4ao3--