tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Jun 20 13:36:14 2009
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Once more into the ship in which I fled
- From: McArdle <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: Once more into the ship in which I fled
- Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 13:35:16 -0700 (PDT)
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1245530116; bh=Z1kxfqAzlUmCnqP8JRw8mdMtwxZ6Fm2tNcWLBBBx4RA=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=ivjhMPJe8KHaUehxLGb0TJ+MhUX3xqJWGYIBu9cKQczFwA16242zyFSd5nha2O2l9mZtaAH2k0tz9p8RjLn9Bz0bfXegSNJjN/965LD6dK1aC5jzrqe80SdNqM47MsDCQuz39aBTRxvNEW0EKLHo/sk4wE3qpHj8t9YPHCMfbSU=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=SHnGvYMpdQgU1eRFXDPz29iKSR4CcauXEfjtUZr0Ahk2UzldrSojPymvLSMq6dJl1uAV4ZCAA/jK3XOMXEtbPByDhJ08iQF3xAq/HiPVPN3rvsHlRDuPvWnavwi6tOCcmN+KPQ1tfAjsq0WPVJLvFwqOyTy8oZj9wT4DVihaKvA=;
--- On Sat, 6/20/09, David Trimboli <email@example.com> wrote:
> From: David Trimboli <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Subject: Re: Once more into the ship in which I fled
> To: email@example.com
> Date: Saturday, June 20, 2009, 9:13 AM
> McArdle wrote:
> > That strikes me as less a solution than a
> rationalization for not
> > finding a solution.
> No, it's a solution which says that Klingon doesn't do what
> asking at all, or at least if there's a way it is unknown
> and probably
> unknowable without input from Okrand.
In its own way, this is fascinating. The responses to my suggestion have mostly clustered around "you're wasting your time with this." The last time this topic was raised (by Holtej last October), there were a number of responses discussing the merits of his proposal, and none at all suggesting that the whole discussion was pointless. You yourself mentioned that MO hadn't found a way to solve the problem, but went on to leave the door open by adding "I don't think that comes
directly from Maltz, however." I took this as an indication that the question was still open and further discussion might be warranted (or, at the very least, not actively rebuffed).
I understand that Holtej has a history and a standing with the group that I don't, but still the difference in the responses is curious.