From sbelknap@UIC.EDU Thu Dec 12 21:29:17 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 13 Dec 2002 05:29:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 75837 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 05:29:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2002 05:29:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 05:29:15 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18MiNv-0002Lc-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:29:15 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18MiNp-0002LJ-00; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:29:09 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:29:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from larch.cc.uic.edu ([128.248.155.164]) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.05) id 18MiNk-0002LA-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:29:04 -0800 Received: (qmail 24012 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 05:28:59 -0000 Received: from dial0-128.dialin.uic.edu (HELO uic.edu) (128.248.170.161) by larch.cc.uic.edu with SMTP; 13 Dec 2002 05:28:59 -0000 Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:29:02 -0600 Subject: [lojban] Re: the ethics of the HTML content meta tag Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) Cc: lojban-list@lojban.org To: rizen@surreality.us In-Reply-To: <20021212142205.1d194dbc.rizen@surreality.us> Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.548) X-archive-position: 3527 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 Thursday, December 12, 2002, at 04:22 PM, Theodore Reed wrote: > On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:18:15 -0600 > Steven Belknap wrote: > >> Judging by the posts to this list, some members of lojbanistan seem >> more than indifferent, they seem quite hostile towards logli and not >> just towards me. Such hostility seems as unwise as it is unkind. > > I have noticed no hostility to logli in this community. There is a > general "if you don't speak lojban, don't try telling us that we're > doing something wrong" attitude, which applies to logli and non-logli > alike, which may be related to what you're talking about. There is sometimes a world of difference between implication and inference. I assume you are aware that some of the leaders of lojbanistan are not at all fluent in LLG Loglan. Should their input be ignored? I think not. The unique experience of some TLI Loglan speakers, professional logicians, linguists, and others not fluent in LLG Loglan may be relevant and helpful. Given the fact that most conlangs fail, it is best to cast ones net widely. If a person brings something valuable to the conversation, he should be given a hearing. Minority opinions should be respected. I agree that the nature of LLG Loglan will be determined largely by those who are most fluent in the language. Another reason for me to stop posting and get back to my gismu drills. I'm satisfied that my point has been made. I will now return to my previous quiescent state of list lurker. -Steven