Padraic Brown wrote:

> On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Aidan Grey wrote:
>> Okay, here's who wants to be involved, so far:
> I'd like to be in as well.
>> Elliott Lash
>> Dan Seriff
>> Amber Adams
>> Andrew Smith
>> Damiel Andreasson
>> Andrew Chaney (I think)
>> David Stokes

Me too.

> A new yahoo group, for example, would alleviate the problems
> of traffic here on Conlang. Anyone not participating but
> still interested in the project could look in and see what's
> happening.

I will be glad to set up and manage this.

Do we want a list anybody can join, or a closed list, or a
join-on-request-to-moderator list?

> I'm neither one way nor the other - but an IE level deal
> would allow a lot more lattitude on our parts.

I don't think the difference is fundamental.  Some people may

want to address a child language, others a remote descendant,
others may create a whole subfamily.

>> And is this going to be an Earth language, or an
>>alternate world? This is going to have a huge effect
>>on historical development, for example. Myself, I'd
>>prefer a new world, because my history sucks, and I
>>could make up whatever history I like on another

I would look for a world with no connection to our
history, but populated by human beings.  This could be
like the Tokana conworld, where the split was tens of
thousands of years ago, or it could be a non-Earth
world where human settlement was in the remote and
forgotten past.

There is / one art             || John Cowan <[log in to unmask]>
no more / no less              ||
to do / all things             ||
with art- / lessness           \\ -- Piet Hein