Re: USAGE: No rants! (USAGE: di"f"thong)

Hi!

Jörg Rhiemeier writes:
>...
> I think it is time to speak another Machtwort as in the Great Sundering,
> and explicitly ban all discussions of spelling reforms (of whatever
> language) and English pronunciation from the CONLANG list the same way
> we have banned auxlang advocacy a decade ago.  Spelling reforms are a
> form of prescriptivism, and don't we all agree that prescriptivism is
> the diametral opposite of conlanging?
>
> What do you think?
>...
Off-topic discussions have always been part of Conlang.  That's no
problem, I think, as they can be filtered.  My own part of the game
will be to remind posters to use the topic tags needed for filtering.

We have the USAGE: tag explicitly for threads about English and other
chatty language stuff.  And those are about language(!), so strictly
speaking, they're not even off-topic (e.g. like Star Trek -- which, I
stress, is also not at all banned if properly CHAT: marked).

Furthermore, auxlang discussions have never been banned here.  What is
banned are flame wars.  One common source was auxlang advocacy, as you
write yourself, that's why it was banned.  Especially for auxlangs,
but to prevent flame wars, it's not wise to advocate other things
agressively either.  I haven't seen much advocacy in this thread --
the discussion was quite well behaved up to now, wasn't it?

And we cannot ban topics that are boring to some people!  Just skip
them.  But, yes!, remember to tell us about your conlangs
throughts, too.

We might want to more eagerly adjust the subject line, though.

>...
> > Now, I've got that off my chest, I can get back to conlanging   ;)
>
> I concur with you.
>...
Weeeeep!  I want that Romance dictionary now!

**Henrik