Re: An Idea (Hopefully Non-offensive)

At 1:57 pm -0400 24/4/01, David Peterson wrote:
>In a message dated 4/24/01 7:06:17 AM, hr_oskar@HOTMAIL.COM writes:
>
><< The contest should rather be "the least bad
>
>auxlang", to put it ungrammatically; the time frame could be something like
>
>one month. But I wonder who could be judge... Raymond? :) :) >>
>
>    Agreed, to the first.  As for the second,
I'm flattered at Oskar's nomination!

Perhaps he knows that I am very skeptical of the whole idea of a
constructed auxlang, so would, in fact, have no special preference.

>my first comment on who should
>judge was so there would the maximum number of us judging as was reasonably
>possible,
My experience in Auxland leads me to diagree strongly here.  My own opinion
FWIW is that a large judging panel will never agree among themselves on the
criteria that makes a "good auxlang".  On the other hand, speaking
personally, I would not want to be a sole judge.  But I think a panel of
three would be right, especially if they were chosen to give a balance.

>so as to prevent special preference, and to allow everyone to enter
>a language, including the judgers (they wouldn't judge their own).
...and they shouldn't be participants.

I got the "churn out another auxlang this month" bug out of my system long
years ago and, as I say, have now become an auxlang-skeptic.  I would not
enter.  In any case, if one of the judges actually one, wouldn't some
wonder if it hadn't been fixed?  Best, I think, not to allows judges to
enter languages themselves.

But as opinions differ so widely about the criteria for auxlangs, it would
surely be fairer if contestants knew what judges would be looking for.  If
I were not so busy at the moment, I would try to put a few ideas.

Ray.





=========================================
A mind which thinks at its own expense
will always interfere with language.
                   [J.G. Hamann 1760]
=========================================

Reply