xorlo & mi nitcu lo mikce
pc:
> --- And Rosta <a.rosta@v21.me.uk> wrote:
> > Solution (1) seems far less disruptive to xorlo
> > and hence to the progress and consensus that
> > the
> > BPFK appears to have achieved.
>
> Since I think that xorlo — even as it was
> presented officially, before the expanding
> explications — is a disaster, preserving it is
> hardly a considertation.
I had the impression (from the official xorlo
page) that xorlo had been discussed and then voted
on by the BPFK with unanimous approval from those
voting. (--No small achievement if set against
the state of lojbanology when I tuned out!)
--And.