Print

Print


> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul Bartlett

> On Tue, 22 May 2007, [log in to unmask] wrote:
> 
> > [most trimmed]
> 
> > Yes, they definitely need to just work on selling Ido on its
own
> > merits rather than trying to leech off the E-o movement.  I
can
> > see where marketing to E-o users may make some sense because
> > these people have already demonstrated and interest in a
> > constructed language, but that shouldn't be the sole focus.
> 
> I have long maintained that it is a strategic blunder to try
to market
> Ido as "reformed Esperanto" or "improved Esperanto."  Recently
I have
> been critiquing some of the documentation for Lingwa de
Planeta now
> being translated into English.  I remarked to Dmitry Ivanov my
opinion
> that the documentation should not go around touting what is
done as in
> Novial or Esperanto or whatever.  If they want to make
comparisons to
> the way something is done in Russian or Arabic or English or
whatever,
> fine, but comparisons to other conIALs are counterproductive. 
>  He seems to agree with me now.

I see no problem with comparisons to other IAL contenders, but I
think marketing only to refugees from the most popular IAL's
severely limits the potential audience, and tends to set a bit
of a negative tone to the alternative IAL's cause.  It's okay to
mention that Ido was the result of an Esperanto reform movement
as a historical note but that shouldn't be the main focus.  It
should focus on the same things E-o does like the facts that
it's regular and easy to learn.

I think it was Justin Rye that originally pointed me to the LdP
site.  At the time is was a mess, but it looks like he's cleaned
it up quite a bit though it still has a long way to go.