From pycyn@aol.com Sat Jun 16 15:15:27 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 16 Jun 2001 22:15:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 25280 invoked from network); 16 Jun 2001 22:15:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 16 Jun 2001 22:15:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m10.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.165) by mta1 with SMTP; 16 Jun 2001 22:15:26 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-m10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v30.22.) id r.11d.63cccf (1759) for ; Sat, 16 Jun 2001 18:15:20 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <11d.63cccf.285d3478@aol.com> Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 18:15:20 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] Are attitudinals assertions? (was: Attitudinals again (was: Sapi... To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_11d.63cccf.285d3478_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10519 From: pycyn@aol.com --part1_11d.63cccf.285d3478_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 6/15/2001 5:30:58 PM Central Daylight Time, rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org writes: > According to you, yes. > > But some of us (gasp! horror!) aren't philosopher or linguists or > logicians. > > You know, your insistence that those of us who don't know as much about > logic as you expect rather reminds me of my insistence that you should > know more about computers and the internet before you speak up. > > So, one way or another you're being a hypocrite. Please pick one. > Well, I didn't sign up for Samban, so I didn't know that computerism was going to become a requirement and I do try to keep up a bit. As all I have done is ask in varrious ways that the development of Lojban not leave the majority, stuck in MS Windows and the like behind, I don't quite see that I need to know more. It is fairly clear that this majority is often ignored (and derided, alas) by computer developers, including some for Lojban. In the interest of growing Lojban, this seems to me a serious mistake. I am happy to see that some steps have been taken to change that, though there are still things unavailable in Windows that can be had on other platforms. That the converse is also true seems to me less of a problem, since it affects so few people. Aside from that, I stay out of technical issues in computers because I don't know much about them. Would that people who don't know much (anything) about linguistics or logic or... would do the same with issues in those fields. Or would enter in an appropriately tentative way and learn by doing and asking, rather than charging in with "the answer" when, as it turns out they have not even understood the question. There is more than enough stuff to do in Lojban -- and very likely much more important stuff to do in Lojban -- other than arguing theory: developing usage, writing stories, translating appropriate texts, carrying on conversations, teaching,.... The metagame is a frill and largely still a foolish 0one until some of those other tasks have gotten further along than they are. Leave it for people who aren't going to do the other stuff or who are going to take an impractical view of things. --part1_11d.63cccf.285d3478_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 6/15/2001 5:30:58 PM Central Daylight Time,
rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org writes:


According to you, yes.

But some of us (gasp! horror!) aren't philosopher or linguists or
logicians.

You know, your insistence that those of us who don't know as much about
logic as you expect rather reminds me of my insistence that you should
know more about computers and the internet before you speak up.

So, one way or another you're being a hypocrite.  Please pick one.


Well, I didn't sign up for Samban, so I didn't know that computerism was
going to become a requirement and I do try to keep up a bit.  As all I have
done is ask in varrious ways that the development of Lojban not leave the
majority, stuck in MS Windows and the like behind, I don't quite see that I
need to know more.  It is fairly clear that this majority is often ignored
(and derided, alas) by computer developers, including some for Lojban.  In
the interest of growing Lojban, this seems to me a serious mistake. I am
happy to see that some steps have been taken to change that, though there are
still things unavailable in Windows that can be had on other platforms.  That
the converse is also true seems to me less of a problem, since it affects so
few people.
Aside from that, I stay out of technical issues in computers because I don't
know much about them.  Would that people who don't know much (anything) about
linguistics or logic or... would do the same with issues in those fields.  Or
would enter in an appropriately tentative way and learn by doing and asking,
rather than charging in with "the answer" when, as it turns out they have not
even understood the question.  There is more than enough stuff to do in
Lojban -- and very likely much more important stuff to do in Lojban -- other
than arguing theory: developing usage, writing stories, translating
appropriate texts, carrying on conversations, teaching,....
The metagame is a frill and largely still a foolish 0one until some of those
other tasks have gotten further along than they are.  Leave it for people who
aren't going to do the other stuff or who are going to take an impractical
view of things. --part1_11d.63cccf.285d3478_boundary--