From lojbab@lojban.org Mon Apr 28 18:25:19 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_6_6); 29 Apr 2003 01:25:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 5770 invoked from network); 29 Apr 2003 01:25:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 29 Apr 2003 01:25:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lakemtao02.cox.net) (68.1.17.243) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 29 Apr 2003 01:25:16 -0000 Received: from lojban.lojban.org ([68.100.92.1]) by lakemtao02.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with ESMTP id <20030429012515.RJLZ24359.lakemtao02.cox.net@lojban.lojban.org> for ; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 21:25:15 -0400 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20030428211932.0390b9f0@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: rlechevalier@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 21:25:10 -0400 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: BPFK phpbb In-Reply-To: <20030428151411.M32091-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> References: <20030428190602.GZ22216@digitalkingdom.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: Robert LeChevalier X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=1120595 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojbab At 03:20 PM 4/28/03 -0400, xod wrote: >On Mon, 28 Apr 2003, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 27, 2003 at 08:44:27PM -0400, Robert LeChevalier wrote: > > > Better yet: stop trying to use PHPBB (which Nora and I have > > > started calling the fybyb because how else do you pronounce it %) > > > as a pseudo jboske. > > > > *AMEN*, brother! Preach the *GOOD* word! > >Then it behooves EVERY BF commissioner to join jboske immediately. Until >that occurs, the desire to be heard will inhibit BF discussions from >erupting there. People will try to post them where the rest of the BF-ists >are paying attention. And then many the byfy-ists will start ignoring the fora, because they don't want to read discussion. Let's do the job of defining the language. > > > (For non-byfy members, this is a change to eliminate selma'o NAI > > > by merging it with UI). Thus, IMO, it is beyond the primary scope > > > for the byfy: an attempt to fix something that is not demonstrably > > > broken. > > > > My new example of how insane this is is > > > > nai nai nai mi nai nelci nai nai nai > > > > which would be legal if this change was made. > >Whatever. I'll answer you on jboske after everyone joins, or after >everyone agrees to Yet Another Forum, and we all sign up to THAT one. It isn't a jboske issue at the level we are posting. Nor is it really a byfy internal issue: the community needs to know what the byfy is doing and how we are doing it (at the general level, and to show that we are sticking to the job set forth in the baseline policy statement) and have confidence that language stability is being strongly supported. jboske can discuss technical details of whatever it wants. Most Lojbanists, possibly including most byfy-ists, aren't interested in discussing changes to the language, but rather in clearly understanding what the language IS. lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org