From xod@sixgirls.org Wed Aug 16 09:11:57 2000
Return-Path: <xod@sixgirls.org>
Received: (qmail 28727 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2000 16:11:56 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m2.onelist.org with QMQP; 16 Aug 2000 16:11:56 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO kali.sixgirls.org) (160.79.75.82) by mta1 with SMTP; 16 Aug 2000 16:11:56 -0000
Received: from localhost (xod@localhost) by kali.sixgirls.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA86902 for <lojban@egroups.com>; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 12:18:06 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 12:18:06 -0400 (EDT)
To: lojban@egroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] ZI'O in English 
In-Reply-To: <e.10c68db.26cc15c5@aol.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0008161216210.86665-100000@kali.sixgirls.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
From: Invent Yourself <xod@sixgirls.org>

On Wed, 16 Aug 2000 pycyn@aol.com wrote:

> xorxes has done a nice trat without using maikl's zi'o joke. I hope the joke 
> has run its course and we can get around to thinking about whether, when 
> baselining is over, we ought to rethink zi'o or whether, before baselining 
> passes, we ought to reinterpret what is said about zi'o in The Book. 


Could you refresh us what the actual controversy is? I'm not sure why an
exceptional brivla case here or there is cause for alarm.