[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Lojbab: > >The formal publishable definitions would follow once the decisions have been > >made, with the definitions composed and/or edited by whoever has the > >requisite energies and abilities. > > I should hope that we are deciding based on formal publishable definitions, > and not on things less fluid. When people are insisting on voting every > typo correction to the gismu list, they will also be voting on every > translation from phpbb discussion into formal definition. If niceties of wording in the formal definition are so crucial, then something is wrong with the definition: it should be sufficiently clear that we don't have to seek recourse of arcane textual exegetics. > >It's not surprising that participants tended not to expend energies on > >defining cmavo that are entirely uncontroversial, since the motivation for > >participating in the BF is to define the elements whose definition had not > >been uncontroversially agreed on. > > It may not be surprising, but that has been the problem for many years - > people want to do what they find interesting, not what needs to be done. > > >IOW, the underlying problem the BF was trying > >to address was not the inadequacy of documentation but the indeterminacy > >of the > >rules and definitions that must be documented. > > The BF was trying to address a lot of things, including the lack of a cmavo > dictionary (or a cmavo list of a sort or quality that could easily be > turned into a dictionary), the miscellaneous complaints about CLL which > were unresolved, and most importantly the lack of a final baseline to start > the 5 year period which WAS impacted by an inadequacy of > documentation. Rather low (nonexistent?) on the list of priorities was the > consideration of anything new that had not been brought up as being > unresolved by CLL. You are free to select your preferred version of history and set of priorities and procedures for the BF. The fact remains that there is currently nobody working in a BF operating in the way you think it should. What activity there is seems to be operating in the manner I described, even though nobody could claim that it is remotely consistent with how Nick said it was supposed to go. --And.