BPFK Procedures Posted by arj on Thu 27 of Nov, 2008 18:30 GMT posts: 953 Use this thread to discuss the page:: BPFK Procedures
Posted by arj on Thu 27 of Nov, 2008 18:59 GMT posts: 953 Recently, Adam and Jorge had a disagreement in a minor point in _BPFK Section: Intensifiers_. They solved it not by discussing until agreement was reached, but by removing the sentence that caused the disagreement. I, too, have sometimes offered to address a disagreement about matters that I think are peripheral to the main topic of the section. It is all well and good that we are pushing ourselves and each other to get this done, and we should congratulate ourselves for not getting bogged down in endless spiralling discussions once again. At the same time, I worry. I worry because, if sometime in the future someone wants to know what the BPFK thinks about some minor peripheral matter, such as what "je'e do'u pei" means, they will find that the BPFK is silent. And that is not good. The BPFK was established because the Lojban community doesn't want ambiguity and Humpty-Dumpty interpretations. They want definite answers. And they want cmavo definitions that are as thorough as possible. Is this a serious threat to the quality of our work? Should something be done to remedy it? Maybe it would be a good idea to separate out contentious issues from a section, so that the non-controversial part can be rubber-stamped, and the controversial part be thoroughly discussed? Perhaps it is the Elephant we need? (http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Elephant) -arj
