From sbelknap@UIC.EDU Wed Dec 11 11:45:08 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 11 Dec 2002 19:45:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 95392 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 19:45:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 11 Dec 2002 19:45:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 19:45:02 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18MCn0-000246-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:45:02 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18MCmq-00023m-00; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:44:52 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:44:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from larch.cc.uic.edu ([128.248.155.164]) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.05) id 18MCmk-00023b-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:44:46 -0800 Received: (qmail 22939 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 19:44:38 -0000 Received: from cis5044.uicomp.uic.edu (HELO uic.edu) (128.248.250.44) by larch.cc.uic.edu with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 19:44:38 -0000 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:44:17 -0600 Subject: [lojban] Re: html tag ethics Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) Cc: lojban-list@lojban.org To: araizen@newmail.net In-Reply-To: <3DF77231.2080802@newmail.net> Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) X-archive-position: 3457 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 Wednesday, December 11, 2002, at 11:13 AM, Adam Raizen wrote: > la stivn. cusku di'e > >> I believe that "LLG Loglan" is clearly distinct from >> "TLI Loglan" If I prefer to use this term and my readers or listeners >> understand me, what harm is done? > > I believe that "gubblick" is clearly distinct from "phrase". If I > prefer > to use this term and my readers or listeners understand me, what harm > is > done? This is an example of the logical fallacy known as a straw man argument. The meaning of "gubblick" would not be known to your readers or listeners. -Steven