Shreyas Sampat wrote:
(in reply to my........
>: Perhaps it would be useful to have a "statement of mission", say on the
>: inside cover of every edition, explaining what we're all about. I'm not
>: sure we should actively discourage _all_ IAL proposals, though perhaps it
>: should be made clear that the more virulent varieties aren't especially
>: welcome.
>
>On the contrary: we encourage IALs as *conlangs*, and are duly interested
in
>the linguistic features thereof, but not the IAL features thereof. They
>should be looked at no differently than other artlangs created with a
>specific purpose, like Lin with its goal of compactness. (Unfortunately
for
>IALs, in my opinion their goals tend to be very subjective things, like a
>'phonology thats easy to pronounce for the vast majority of people', or a
>'grammar that's easy to learn'. A possible solution would be to ground the
>goals more concretely : 'a phonology that maximizes acoustic distinctness',
>'a grammar that can disambiguate precisely and is independent of
prosodics',
>so that they can be discussed on a solid factual basis.)
>
>On the other hand, I'd like to encourage the disencouragement of auxlang
>*promotion*. Discussion is great.
>(has been trying to break the lurker habit)
Apologies if my phrasing was unclear, or overly harsh. You have said what I
meant.