[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Lojbab: > At 10:57 AM 5/1/03 -0700, Jorge "Llamb�as" wrote: [...] > >"Just because" is not a satisfactory answer for everybody > > There is no answer that is satisfactory for everybody > > The answer NOW is that the language is baselined and we are only fixing > what is broken, not what is aesthetically unsatisfactory. That amounts to > "just because" unless it causes a problem in the byfy defining it [...] > >If allowing them simplifies the grammar, it is not a cost, you'd > >have to eplain why they are worth complicating the grammar to > >disallow them > > Because the grammar is baselined > > You should brought this up 5 years ago (when indeed you were the primary > commentator on the pre-baselined CLL chapters, and the tense stuff was one > of the first chapters available). If you did, and did not convince then, > I'm not likely to be convinced now > > > > Like I was saying though; I think the burden is on the positive > > > claim that it should be allowed. "There's not reason not to" doesn't > > > count as a reason for it > > > >To me, there can't be a better reason than that > > For a baselined language, that is not a reason It is a waste of everybody's time for you to be posting this to Jboske, which is for the technical discussion of Lojban, not for reiterations of a construal of general BF policy. Jordan & Jorge are debating the pros and cons of grammar changes from the point of view of their relative complexity, naturalness & so forth. Whether those changes would be voted down if put to a BF vote is an irrelevance here. Here is where we discuss, among other things, how Lojban could be improved if it were open to improvements. --And.