Re: Lojbab on lojban list (Was: Re: reply to And #3)

[Chris Bogart <cbogart@QUETZAL.COM>]

>the lojban list is a floor-wax _and_ a dessert topping

It's a *dessert topping*, doi bakni.

>I have noticed that
>beginner oriented conversations tend to be relatively short, usually
>asking a question and receiving the word(s) of God(s).  =20

What do you think would be a useful way to deal with that?  I think a =
few times I've answered a beginner question in that way, and you're =
right, it does tend to sort of stop the conversation.  Any idea about a =
better way to answer?

>To summarize:
>Technical debates: (IMVHO) yes - keep 'em up.  It'd be nice if you =
could
>make sure newbies at least understand the problem, though.  This would
>probably benefit you too.  I've noticed one or two occasions where the
>(advanced) people engaged in the debate didn't know what it was about
>either - "Oh, *that's* what the problem is?"

This echoes Lojbab's idea of having an official Issues List with current =
problem areas and proposed conclusions.  It would not only only serve to =
record what was decided, if anything (or the N different positions if =
the discussion resulted in deadlock), but to explain in non-technical =
terms what the whole matter is about.  I think it also might help focus =
the discussions, and thereby maybe keep them shorter -- I know the le/lo =
discussions, as well as the ni discussions, were confounded by the fact =
that there were several related issues being discussed and I for one was =
not always sure which subissue was being addressed.

It could also start off with a disclaimer between giant asterisks that =
warned people that this is only discussion of the arcanities -- that the =
language is complete, usable, and unchanging, and that everything that =
follows can be safely ignored by new learners if they're not interested.

co'o mi'e kris