Re: Fire Hydrant for the Flames

On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 20:38:51 -0000 Jonathan Knibb
<jonathan_knibb@...> writes:
> Peter Clark wrote:
> >>>
> Hence, my proposal: we agree upon a system by which one person can
> submit their language for peer review.
> <<<
I wholly support this suggestion.  It's a fabulous idea and will largely
solve the problems I was trying to address in my original post, without
the divisive influence of labeling conlang "schools".  That proved to be
wildly unpopular, and I'm backing off of it now.  (All in about 48
hours--how's that for quick turnaround time and low membership in an
artistic movement? ;-P )

As another alternative, we could set up a system similar to the one used
on the writing critique group I'm a part of.  People earn points by
critiquing others' conlangs, and then cash in those points for the right
to get their conlang reviewed.  There would be certain requirements for
what could get a point (e.g. you have to write more than five sentences),
but no theoretical limit on how often or when you can post languages for
critique, provided that you have enough points for it.

The obvious downside: someone has the labor-intensive job of keeping
track of the points and indicating which posts are sanctioned for review
and which aren't.  At the same time, with all of the computer knowledge
on this list it shouldn't be too hard to set up a website and database to
do this automatically.

Jesse S. Bangs     Pelíran
jaspax@ juno.com
"Skin and tragedy always attract a crowd."
    --Pedro the Lion

Reply