Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: conlang t-shirt

From:Raymond Brown <ray.brown@...>
Date:Monday, November 8, 1999, 18:50
At 8:08 pm -0500 7/11/99, Sam Bryant wrote:
>Paul Bennet wrote: >>Oh, certainly. I may have misthunk when I said "general principles". What I >>meant was for the discussions that form maybe a half or two thirds of this >>list >>(website updates, tech, theory, tan, terminology, usage, help, most of the >>"general purpose" offs) should stay here, and the discussion of things >>specific >>to individual artlangs or artlangs in general (and associated topics, such as >>relays) could move to an artlang list. As stated, I'd still read and post in >>both, but the distinction is probably useful. > >My gut reaction is that this would cripple growth of the community.
I see - so that's what the proposed split was about. I'm 100% with Sam on this one. There are lists a-plenty for different sorts of conlangs & particular conlangs if one looks. But to move all artlang topics from this list would, I think, kill it off. When one's removed auxlangs & artlangs - there's not a great deal left. Oh yes, I know - there are loglans. But I suspect if one were specifically interested in them one would be on, say, the lojban list.
>New (or >newly online) conlangers are going to find the CONLANG list first, and I >think it is precisely the discussion of artlangs here that attracts so many >of us to this list.
I think this is largely true.
>To take away from the word "conlang", in the souls of >netizens, the associations of exactly the atmosphere we have here, I think, >would be a bad thing, and putting all the techs/theory/tangent stuff in the >most prominent list would cause more problems than it creates.
It would kill it, I think. Ray. ========================================= A mind which thinks at its own expense will always interfere with language. [J.G. Hamann 1760] =========================================