Re: New to the list

> Date:         Thu, 15 Jun 2000 11:32:38 -0400
> From: Oskar Gudlaugsson <hr_oskar@...>
> Anyway, subscribers to AUXLANG would be familiar with me, as I've
> been on that list for a month or so. However, I just decided to
> leave it, as I'm sick of the pointless bickering there about
> personal matters or the utterly uninteresting history of the
> IAL-movement. Not enough useful discussion going on there.
>
> I'm well aware that discussions on auxlangs are not allowed on this list.
No --- the policy is actually that IAL politics are not wanted here.

Any technical or aesthetic aspect of any constructed language can be
discussed here. And since the technical aspects of natural languages
provide so much of the background for creating new ones, there is
really no way of excluding them either.

On the other hand, talking about the practical aspects of adopting a
constructed language as an IAL immediately leads to huge flamewars,
politicizing, moralizing, general acrimony and endless bickering ---
in no particular order. So that's reserved for people who like it.

That's the way I meant it when I split the lists. As an example, an
objective discussion of how easy different languages (nat- or con-)
are to learn would be quite in order here. But AUXLANG is the only
place for discussing if ease of learning is more or less important
than other aspects of an IAL.

(And it is a lasting source of pleased wonderment to me that simply
making a separate list has pretty well kept all such discussions out
of this one).

> What I'm saying is: I have no interest in the politics on AUXLANG.
> I'm a conlanger with particular interest in the design of IALs, with
> no concern for their actual use at all. I don't propagate.
You will fit right in here. Welcome.

ObConlang: Does anyone have a language where the same word means both
'politics' and 'endless bickering'?

ObNatlang: Which is easier to learn, Tok Pisin or Bahasa Indonesia?

Lars Mathiesen (U of Copenhagen CS Dep) <thorinn@...> (Humour NOT marked)