From sbelknap@UIC.EDU Tue Dec 10 14:32:15 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 22:32:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 41119 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 22:32:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 10 Dec 2002 22:32:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 22:32:15 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18LsvG-0006Zv-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:32:14 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18LsvD-0006Zc-00; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:32:11 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:32:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from larch.cc.uic.edu ([128.248.155.164]) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.05) id 18Lsv7-0006Xt-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:32:05 -0800 Received: (qmail 15267 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 22:31:58 -0000 Received: from cis5044.uicomp.uic.edu (HELO uic.edu) (128.248.250.44) by larch.cc.uic.edu with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 22:31:58 -0000 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:31:37 -0600 Subject: [lojban] Re: let's get rid of this lojban == loglan crap (was Re: tags) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) Cc: lojban-list@lojban.org To: xod@thestonecutters.net In-Reply-To: <20021210135837.Q6796-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> Message-Id: <255F1EE4-0C8F-11D7-A99A-000393629ED4@uic.edu> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) X-archive-position: 3423 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: Steven Belknap Reply-To: sbelknap@uic.edu X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=810567 On Tuesday, December 10, 2002, at 12:59 PM, Invent Yourself wrote: >>>> >>>> There was a very difficult and expensive legal battle fought over >>>> this, and those who participated in it would probably not want their >>>> effort to be nullified, and historically Lojban is related to >>>> Loglan, >>>> so at least for those reasons it would probably be difficult to >>>> straight-out revoke the "lojban is loglan" statement. I think that a >>>> clarification is in order, though. >>>> >>> >>> How about something like "Lojban is a variant of Loglan". Or >>> "development" or whatever. >> >> Sounds good to me. > > > > Or that Lojban is a language in the Lojban family. If you mean, "Lojban is a language in the Loglan family." That would be OK with me. -Steven