Re: Lists

[And Rosta <a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK>]

Lojbab:
> >Create another list, say
> >> "lojban-tech", strictly for debates among those of us who enjoy
> >> working out the excruciating details about exactly what {ni} and
> >> {jei} are supposed to mean.
> >
> >I favour this option. I didn't reply sooner, because I was waiting
> >to see whether Lojbab might oppose it as detrimental to Lojban.
> >But if Lojban positively wants to avoid people's getting exposed
> >to debates, then yours seems the best solution.
>
> Lojbab expresses no opinion officially, since my job if nothing else is to
> foster independent action regarding Lojban on the part of the community.
> If I squelch everything, I fail to do my job.  I don't know if the proposal
> will be useful or not.  I am skeptical at the very least because the problem
> remains that people who spend time arguing about Lojban are not spending time
> USING Lojban, and the people best suited to do the latter are the ones who
> usually do the former.  But other than that worry, ANYTHING people do with
> the language is a GOOD THING.

OK, it's a good thing to discuss Lojban. But is it a good thing
to discuss it at great length on the one and only Lojban list,
as opposed to discussing it at great length on another list.
Discussing it less it not an option that pi ro the community
wishes to commit itself to.

--And