Mike,
I have no degree in literature to understand what you have written
without difficulty, and I'm not gonna sit here trying to decipher
what your writing means.
As I understand, at the end you ask how couldv'e BYLT changed if it
wasn't demarcated in soviet times (?) Answer is: so what that the
border BYSSRLTSSR wasn't demarcated, it was established. Right after
independence that border served as LTSU and then as BYLT. Later BY
and LT officials sat down and redrew the maps, usually to the
Belarusian favor. Minor adjustments were made to the border
everywhere. After that they went and demarcated. (Belarusians ran out
of money and haven't yet finished their side). I'm talking because I
know. If I don't know, I add "I think" or "it seems/looks like", etc.
--- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "acroorca2002" <orc@o...> wrote:
> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Karolis B."
> <kbajoraz@y...> wrote:
> > > ok then that appears to bust our surmise that the 6x6m
> framed
> > > square of everyones land enclosing all 4 of the mentioned
> > > elements might be some kind of a legal tridominium
> > > as contemplated & seriously entertained following jans
> original
> > > report in message 3696
> >
> > No. of course not! the border guards couldn't've told Jan that
> they
> > were allowing him a legally illegal thing, so came up with
> something
> > like that. Worse if they actually believed it. It's unbelievable,
the
> > landlord at an apartment I stayed in Nida, Curonian Spit this
> summer
> > shared with me her outrage that 2 km stretch of prime
> Curonian land
> > was "neutral zone". The fact that the LT and the RU border
> posts were
> > separated by that distance convinced her so. The point on the
> beach,
> > 1340 m inward from the border, where the Lithuanian border
> guard
> > stood at guard of the insanly thick border protection zone, was
> where
> > the prime Curonian no one's land started. I guess it figures for
> > border-ignorant people. Couldn't say that the Lithuanian border
> > guards usually seem to know where the border is either.
>
> thank you don q for this chain of apparent sequiturs
>
> your agreement or disagreement is duly noted
> in case either of these is what you also meant to register
> tho i honestly cant tell yet
> which if indeed either
>
> so perhaps you will eventually clarify this
> tho no matter
>
> >
> >
> > >
> > > instead what the square area appears to be is just
> > > the project
> > > as worked out per article 3 above
> > > & any universality inhering in this area appears still to be
> purely
> > > sentimental & symbolic
> >
> >
> > yeah, and de facto sometimes too i guess.
> >
> >
> >
> > > & tho this little quasi triarea has a practical purpose too in
> > > facilitating visitation of the tripoint
> >
> > which happens. (sarcastic)
>
> not me
> are you
>
> also just between us clowns
> i am not sure i follow all your other sequiturs here yet either
> but i am glad you at least seem to think you understand me
> better this morning
> & may even have had a good nap too
>
>
> still you also seem to be earnestly & persistently committed to
> pointing us toward & even projecting upon us your sense of
> tragedy & outrage & sarcasm etc
> often quixotically aimed at any apparent authority
> or yikes even more quixotically aimed here at bp
> & i wonder if you really like tilting at all these windmills
> & if so why
> or if you wouldnt prefer the relief of just lightening up on such
> oppressive illusions
> because happily there is nothing here promoting or encouraging
> them in any way
> so far as i can tell
>
> rather
> i would suggest if i may
> as an alternative try pointing technique
> to come tilt with us instead at all these new improved multiple
> yet completely painless windmills of ours
>
> & when not tilting at these the multipoints directly
> certainly continue to carry on about anything you like
> but if any side topic or reaction doesnt feel good to you
> then rather than offering it to us to feel not good in turn
> which is not really much of a favor to us anyway
> just consider it irrelevant & extraneous here at bp
> & a misorientation or navigational error at try pointing
> which it evidently really is
> or would be if you pursued it
>
> >
> > > as we have seen
> > > there does not appear to be any actual multidominium here
> yet
> > >
> > >
> > > also there really is no discernible difference in the byltlv
> > position
> > > depicted in jespers 2 map swatches above
> > > ref message 9496
> > > but only in the general alignment of the bylt boundary
> > >
> >
> > I would also think the the TP did not change. It was simply
> searched
> > out by BYans LTians and LVians as shown on soviet maps
> and pointed at
> > on the ground, since soviet internal borders suely weren't
> marked in
> > any way (are you kidding, US states seldom have these,
>
> only hawaii lacks these
> & practically every other state has hundreds of them
> tho this fact is for all i can tell neither here nor there anyway
> since it is admittedly hard to follow your train of thought
> or see the eventual point to it
> unless
> aha
> unless
> this is your idea of ironic symmetry
> in which case i grant it is a pretty funny joke
>
> any symbol of
> > nationality/sovereignty realted division would be heretic in SU).
> > put from the point onwards, the BY/LT Republics border
> seldom matches
> > that of the SSR's.
>
> you just said the soviet internal boundaries surely werent
> marked in any way
> so i dont yet see how your belief about where these boundaries
> might have been located in the past is any more reliable or
> authentic than the eventual determinations of them by the
> postsoviet boundary commissioners
>
> i mean i dont see how or what actual changes could objectively
> & undeniably have occurred under these specific circumstances
>
> i suppose if a tripoint had perceptibly moved
> that might have been something to write home about as it were
> but short of that
> what even minor changes are we or you talking about here
> anyway
>
> crystallizations & precipitations perhaps
> but changes in alignment as such
> even minor ones
> i dont yet see how they would even have been perceived
> except by people with conflicting maps
> or who were already out of touch with reality
> a reality which may simply have been
> for all i can tell from here
> that all these supposed boundaries were just soft frontiers
> until they were finally hardened up into real boundaries
> by people who presumably meant well & basically did a good job
> even if they seemed too arbitrary or even unfair at times in the
> eyes of some parties
>
> but nobody said borders are supposed to be a good deal
>
> by & large they are just old military fronts
>
> Minor adjustments, but still, with loss of
> > Pagiriai being the most tragic consequence for us. (Adutiskis
> was
> > also about to disappear)
> >
> >
> > > the 5x difference in scale may be misleading
> > >
> > > the tripoint position per se
> > > does not appear to have ever been displaced
> > > but only refined & zeroed in upon by the demarcation process