Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

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

From:Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhiemeier@...>
Date:Wednesday, June 7, 2006, 19:52

On Fri, 2 Jun 2006 08:44:56 +0100, R A Brown wrote:

> [...] > > I have often wished YAEPTs and spelling reformers had their own lists > (Surely such lists must exist?), but .......
There are certainly mailing lists for the topic of English spelling reform (though I know none - but I never looked because that thing doesn't interest me shite); however, I'd guess they are at least as flame-laden as AUXLANG. It is such a similar game.
> ================================================== > > Henrik Theiling wrote: > [snip] > > > > 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. > > Yes, I think banning all off-topic threads would be against the spirit > of the list (even tho I find some threads tedious).
True; especially given the fact that the line between on-topic and off-topic is difficult to draw.
> > 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). > > Yep - a greater use of tags would help.
Amen. Tags; changes of subject lines; reconsidering list-worthyness before sending it.
> > Furthermore, auxlang discussions have never been banned here. What is > > banned are flame wars. > > Quite so - and those of us who have, for what ever reason, at some time > or other got involved with auxlangs know just how inflammatory the > auxlanging can be. Much the same could - but thankfully so far has not > on this list - happen with spelling reform: my reform is better than yours.
> [snip] > > 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.
Yes. There is much stuff in the list I find personally uninteresting despite being perfectly on-topic.
> I agree - but when I trash most of 164 mails I sort of get a bit > disappointed. I think "Er, not much conlanging here."
> > We might want to more eagerly adjust the subject line, though.
And think twice whether it is really list-worthy.
Yep. ... brought to you by the Weeping Elf


Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...>