From ragnarok@pobox.com Thu Dec 12 13:34:26 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: raganok@intrex.net X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 12 Dec 2002 21:34:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 47457 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 21:34:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 12 Dec 2002 21:34:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.intrex.net) (209.42.192.250) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 21:34:25 -0000 Received: from Craig [209.42.200.38] by smtp.intrex.net (SMTPD32-5.05) id A0E6691700E6; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 16:34:30 -0500 To: Subject: RE: [lojban] Re: bridling hostility (was: RE: Re: the ethics of the HTML content meta tag Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 16:34:24 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal X-Declude-Sender: raganok@intrex.net [209.42.200.38] X-Note: Total weight is 0. Whitelisted X-eGroups-From: "Craig" From: "Craig" Reply-To: X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=48763382 X-Yahoo-Profile: kreig_daniyl >> I think he *is* speaking out of a yen to abuse meta tags (though >> certainly he wouldn't consider it abuse). He's not satisfied with >> them either---he wants the tag changed to try to fool search >> engines. Furthermore I doubt that he is actually speaking out of >> what he thinks is "best for lojban"---the whole "LLG Loglan" thing >> is essentially trolling, designed to piss people off and nothing >> else. >> >> It's quite incredible really. >Is it? The official name of the language is "lojban: a realization of >Loglan." What is inappropriate about having the *official name* of the >language in the title of the lojban.org web page? I would oppose >"fooling" search engines. I would support having the lojban.org web >presence reflect reality. Loglan: The Logical Language (your proposed title) includes neither the offician name ("Lojban: A realization of Loglan") NOR the first word of that official name, which is the name by which EVERYONE BUT YOU calls the language. BTW, I doubt very much that Jordan needed two copies of that last mail.