Print

Print


The chances of you ;finding the solution is zero based on the past 150 years of the same 
kind of experimenting.

The ones that already work are the best ones to work with, and let usage change them, not 
theory.

150 years of repeating the same old questions with the same old disproven arguments goes 
no where, and people know it but can't quite come to grips with it, so they ignore it and think 
they over all the others who have tried will succeed.

Time for creation is over. It's time to market, or forget it.

Bob

On 25 Oct 2007 at 9:29, Bruce Gilson wrote:

> On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 18:32:19 -0700, Jens Wilkinson
> <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> 
> --- auliuniv <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > > So, the public reading this list are turned off on
> > > the whole concept. Of course, it is not just this
> > > list, but the same type of confusion promolgated on
> > > the public by other other groups too. It
> > > just snowballs into a very negative affect on the
> > > public. But, to the language hobbyist he/she
> > > is only having fun.
> >
> > Do you really think that people are turned off from
> > the concept of IALs because there is no consensus? I
> > don't know if anyone has ever done any market research
> > among the public on their perceptions of the idea of
> > an IAL, but if it has been done, I'd be happy to see
> > the results. My own perception is this: most people
> > think that IALs are unnecessary, so the confusion is
> > not really an issue. Some people may be turned off
> > because there is no consensus. And I think also,
> > people may be turned off because IAL promoters sound
> > like zealots, like they have some magic pill that will
> > save the world. And to be honest, a lot of people are
> > turned off by people who tell them that they have the
> > "solution".
> >
> > But I would really take exception to your comments
> > about hobbying. I also see this as something different
> > than a hobby. But on the other hand, if we act as if
> > we have the solution and nobody has the right to even
> > experiment, we will end up sounding arrogant and
> > people will come to see us like Nazis who try to crush
> > anyone not following the proper line. OK, it's sort of
> > an image thing, but I think that one has to be
> > careful.
> 
> 
> Whatever my differences with Jens, I think this is one thing with
> which I
> heartily agree. We need to work on this in the spirit of
> experimentation to
> find the best solution, not dogmatism about solutions already
> proposed.
> 
> -- 
> 
>                                                                     
> Bruce
> R. Gilson
> 
> [log in to unmask]
>