Re: Response to Steve Rice

[cbmvax!uunet!PRC.Unisys.COM!dave]

I am quite interested in Lojban, and hope to make time this summer to
learn some vocabulary and get started.  However, I'm only interested
in it from a scientific viewpoint--whether it can help give me any
insights into my AI work.  While I wish Lojban well, I have no
significant interest in its legal battle, and even less in what I
perceive as petty bickering.  Please consider that there are likely to
be others in my position, and consider your response to this message
in this light.

>Anyway, to give you some idea how petty and obnoxious "Institute Log6)n"
>looks to a logli, for the remainder of this message I will refer to
>"Group Lojban."  Again, I do this not to be testy, but to give you a

> > tolerance for gossip".  This sounds quite testy to me.  Most people
...
> > We use the term "Institute Loglan" to avoid confusion among the audience
> > of the several meanings of Loglan.  In addition to the language as named

To me it seems like basic courtesy to refer to individuals and to
groups according to the designation they prefer.  If Steve Rice finds
"Institute Loglan" obnoxious (and if he is in any way representative),
is there any reason to persist in using this name?  Why don't the two
of you work out (in private!) some more acceptable term?  Maybe simply
defining "Loglan" (unqualified) to be what Lojbab calls "Institute
Loglan" would be enough.

Is it important to my learning of Lojban to distinguish "the several
meanings of Loglan"?  My assumption is that it is not, and this is all
political.  I readily agree that politics is important, possibly even
critical to Lojban's survival; I'm just saying that I personally have
no stake and no interest in the matter.  I'd like to learn Lojban; I
don't want to watch people playing moral superiority games.

> > Now can we cease being mutually rude, and work to end dispute rather
> > than cause more?

Good suggestion.

I think Steve Rice brings a different viewpoint to this group, and is
*potentially* a valuable discussant.  This may mean pointing out flaws
in Lojban, and ways in which Loglan is better.  (Yes, there may be
some!)  The suitable response is to provide a thoughtful, polite
counterargument, or to improve the language.  My experience on the
Internet suggests such rational responses require an inner peace that
very few possess.

If anyone feels impelled to flame me, please do so via email rather
than public postings, in order to minimize the irritation content of
this group.  I probably won't respond, but I will read it--if it isn't
too long :-).


-- Dave Matuszek (dave@prc.unisys.com)  I don't speak for my employer. --
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   Freedom of speech:  1776-1991.  R.I.P.                              |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------