> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Donald J. HARLOW > I think that comparing some new IAL wannabe to other planned > languages is not necessarily a bad thing to do, but you have to do it > right. Namely, don't compare it to, let us say, Esperanto, but to > Esperanto, Ido and Interlingua, all taken as outdated equals; that > way, you're not going to redirect your interested party to some other > particular planned language, and at the same time you can say "I did > this better than any of these earlier attempts did." (*) I would expect that anyone interested in learning an IAL whether is be Ido, Interlingua, etc., would probably have already heard of Esperanto. It's definitely plays a prominent role in the IAL movement and is tough to ignore. Given that, it's only natural that someone looking at the alternative languages may want to know how they stack up against the goliath.