From lojban-out@lojban.org Wed Dec 11 11:46:12 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 19:46:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 96602 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2002 19:46:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 11 Dec 2002 19:46:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 11 Dec 2002 19:46:08 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18MCo4-000259-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:46:08 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18MCny-00024i-00; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:46:02 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:46:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from rlpowell by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18MCnq-00024V-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:45:54 -0800 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:45:54 -0800 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: html tag ethics Message-ID: <20021211194554.GD11342@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org References: <3DF77231.2080802@newmail.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-archive-position: 3458 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: Robin Lee Powell From: Robin Lee Powell Reply-To: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 01:44:17PM -0600, Steven Belknap wrote: > 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. If you say "Loglan" without any other specification, everyone here will assume you're referring to TLI Loglan. -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** I'm a *male* Robin. .i le pamoi velru'e zo'u jmaji le plibu taxfu .i le remoi velru'e zo'u mo .i le cimoi velru'e zo'u ba'e prali .uisai http://www.lojban.org/ *** to sa'a cu'u lei pibyta'u cridrnoma toi