Re: introduction Middelsprake : artlangs & conlangs vs. auxlangs

Hi!

Stephen Mulraney <ataltane.conlang@...> writes:
> On 6/28/05, tomhchappell <tomhchappell@...> wrote:
> > Ingmar does seem to be involved with an AuxLang project; but
> > MiddelSprake is not it.
> >
> > I think that those things about MiddelSprake that Ingmar has chosen
> > to post here, I would welcome here.
> >
> > Is that about what most others think?  Or does it need modification?
>
> IIRC, under the ancien regime, discussion of auxlangs was not forbidden,
> only promotion of them as auxlangs. That is, discussion of their technical
> details was allowed. I'm not aware that any intentional change in policy
> has occurred, though the occasional instances of auxlang-related trouble
> sometimes has the result of suggesting to people that discussion of
> auxlangs themselves should be forbidden.
The policy definitely has not changed.  Details about any conlang
whatsoever are very, very welcome as ever.

> IMHO, this doesn't make a lot of sense.
Indeed.  And there's no need to change that policy as the only reason
for flame wars would be promotion and advocacy, not a good discussion.

> For one things, auxlangs stripped of their politics are as
> interesting as other conlangs.
Exactly. :-)

> And Ingmar certainly seems to be capable of keeping within the
> allowed region of discussion, ...
Ingmar definitely is, yes. :-)

> ObConlang: Drat. No activity for a long time...
Yes.  Maybe people are out for summer activities instead of working at
their conlangs indoors.

I *plan* to make progress with my newest conlang myself, but I must
program the vowel harmony first -- I made a mistake last time when I
presented the vowel harmony rules and did not notice that the name of
the language itself was wrong...

**Henrik