[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Mon, Dec 23, 2002 at 12:54:22PM -0000, And Rosta wrote:
> Lojbab:
> > At 05:19 PM 12/22/02 +0000, And Rosta wrote:
[...]
> > >The best way to avoid sacrificing continuity is to leave the mess
> > >exactly as it is
> >
> > Yes, but that does not get a dictionary written
>
> The dictionary entries for the mess could be written by the people
> who understand it. I observe that you and Jordan, the two defenders
> of lojbanmasses, have just posted apparently contradictory messages
> about mei. So one solution would be to treat mei as polysemous.
If there was a contradiction then by definition one of us was in
error. I didn't read lojbab's, so I can't comment. But it doesn't
help your case any unless you find a contradiction *in* *the* *book*.
[...]
> > The discussions we are having are NOT aimed at the "voting", but at the
> > consensus building that will be necessary whenever the vote will be divided
> > (as seems likely in this case), since consensus is not "majority rules"
>
> How can consensus develop when one person's judgements are conditioned by
> such different factors from another's? In particular, there are some of
> us who prefer things continuous with the past even if kludgey, while
> there are others who prefer things elegant even if not continuous with
> the past. It seems to me that the only way consensus can emerge is for
> there to be enough of a poll for it to be clear what the majority view
> is and for the minority to acquiesce. That is what happened with the
> original academyless baseline freeze and now with the emergence of the
> BF.
>
> More generally, consensus can emerge on relatively rational issues,
> such as the range of meanings that we want Lojban to be able to
> express. But on more ideological issues, such as how those meanings
> are to be expressed, there is no truly consensual solution waiting to
> be discovered, and the solution has to the one that the greatest
> number of people are least unhappy with.
People could trade consensus on issues also. "You can have your
fooby foo gadri if I get Blah", etc.
Anyway, if lojbanists can't get consensus on *anything*, which is
a possibility, then lojban should just, as they say, die in the
arse.
--
Jordan DeLong - fracture@hidden.email
lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u
sei la mark. tuen. cusku
Attachment:
binFcUnAUW0u7.bin
Description: application/ygp-stripped