Re: CHAT: LUNATIC again; was: META, CHAT: Anyone see the irony? AND "Let's , Return to Conlang...

At 12:50 pm -0500 3/11/98, Sally Caves wrote:
>Addenda to the Lunatic Survey Revisited, this time for auxlangers.
>Scroll down a bit...I start in after Terry makes his most pungeant point.
>
>On Tue, 3 Nov 1998, Terrence Donnelly wrote:
>
>> At 12:20 PM 11/3/98 +0200, you wrote:
>> >Karol Conlangdjien! (Dear Conlangists)
>> >
>> >I'm probably not the first or only one to sense a certain irony here.
>> >Some people who just want to talk about languages, especially Conlangs,
>> >to each other manage to have nice and interesting conversations and
>> >enjoy themselves, thus bringing people closer together. Some other
>> >people are out to save the world and end up yelling at each offensively.
>> >Strange, innit??
Indeed, you are not the first to note the irony.  It has been noted several
times in the past, including IIRC on AUXLANG itself.

>Unbelievable.  But this should not be taken to reflect auxlanging in
>general.  This is the indulgence of two specific people who happen to be
>auxlangers.
I wish most heartily I could agree with Sally; but my experience of some
four years or so on AUXLANG was quite different.  The 'gentlemen' like Stan
Mulaik & Don Harlow seemed to me the exceptions; eristic indulgence was the
norm.

Like Rick Harrison, for whom I have great respect, I am ashamed to have
been part of that scene and, indeed, to have played some part in the recent
brief glimpse of Auxlang flaming here.  I apologize most readily for my
part.

I urge anyone who has not read Rick's excellent essay "Farewell to
Auxlangs" to do so.

[snip]
>she implies as much of the Universal Language enthusiasts as well. But let
>me address this issue again, from the IAL point of view, and speak to the
>fascinating debate we're having on this topic right now:
I'd love to reply to Sally's questions - but forebear to do so (tho I may
reply privately, if Sally wishes).

All I'll say is that I'm feel one reason my 'briefscript' is going so
slowly is that I'm afraid that it might be taken as a serious conIAL
instead of an intellectual experiment on my part to see if I can reconcile
what I perceive (maybe wrongly) to have been two to some extent
incompatible aims of a former would-be conIAList.

>
>> I'm 45, so measure me for my shroud!
>
>I'm forty-five, too, Terry, and I don't feel anywhere near death.
45?  You're both still whipper-snappers  ;)

Ray.