[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

RE: [jboske] Re: fundamentalism: reply to Nick



Nick:
> And, you're forcing my hand. Therefore I choose (I):
> 
> > (I) The BF is nonnegotiably fundamentalist, and the CLL is right
> > in every respect where it cannot be shown to unsalvageably
> > contradictory or in conflict with basic Loglan principles. The
> > BF will work to complete the documentation of Standard Lojban
> > (Catnyjbo) 
> 
> The alternative (majority vote, agree to disagree) is public 
> schismaticism, and is intolerable to me 
> 
> (I) is what the charter says, and however many patches I would like to 
> apply to Standard Lojban to address formalist concerns, fundament still 
> trumps formalism in my programme. My hand is forced, and my die is cast 
> 
> Because I am not infinite, and want to abandon Lojban for historical 
> linguistics eventually --- and for ideological reasons of my own --- I 
> will not join you for Lojban Mark II 
> 
> > The BF can choose to try to emulate in SL bits of AL in the
> > hope that SL will become good enough to stop people preferring AL 
> 
> That is my professed aim. Whether you choose to collaborate in that 
> aim, or abstain from it as something you regard as illegitimate, is up 
> to you. Your participation in the BPFK is not conditional on it 
> 
> I'll settle for that. I am sublimely unhappy about it, but if that's 
> the only way to have you on board, it'll have to do 

You needn't sound so glum! I just agreed to participate. From my
point of view, it'll be a blessed relief; I won't have to worry
about what I think is in the best interests of Lojban, all I need
to think about is whether it is possible to wring a consistent
and coherent story out of CLL, and whether proposed additions
or fixes to truly broken stuff are coherent. Yes I'll be helping
to patch Microsoft Lojban, but I'll be doing it because my pals
want me to and because, like you, I'm addicted. From your point of
view you'll get from me the stuff you want and not the bits you
don't want (the bit that says "hey! 99% of Lojbanists are 
concertedly straying from the paths of lojbo righteousness").

So long as I mark stuff on Academic Lojban as such, it can be
dismissed as what Jordan would call "redeculous tinkering".
(Perhaps we could agree on 'Redeculosity' as a nonpartisan
term for it...)

--And.