Re: Lists

[Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>]

>> 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
>--More--
>> 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 tim
>> 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.


As I said, I express no opinion officially,  I thought that the above answered y
your question.  I want to see lojban be used for what the community wishes
to use it for.  If the community only wishes to discuss it and not to
speak/write in it, then so be it (but it fails as a language),  Better
discussed though, than forgotten.  I remain committed to the language's
success.  (I hope we sell more booksso that we have the money to DO
something towards the language's success).  If people want to use the language,
then I think that long technical discussions distract from such use.  But
moving to another list may not be a solution, if all it does is make people
subscribe to two lists and the same traffic continues. The people who are not
writing in Lojban now will still not be writ9ing, because they will be on and
reading the other list.

I want to change the traffic mix (proportions).  I have no reason to believe
a new list will do so.  I have no reason to believe that a new list will
not do so.

lojbab