--- On Sat, 10/25/08, James Chandler <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Steve scrit:
> >a. Superficially, Ido hasn't much to offer, being
> not widespread and rarely used ("poke difuzita e rare
> uzata").
> Steve, I think you need to join the real world.  How do you
> think the man in the street would describe Esperanto? 
> "Not widespread and rarely used" would be the most
> common answer you would get.  Hence my request to define the
> term "practical auxlang".  What this means to Joe
> Public and what it means to an experienced Espist are two
> different things.

Again, I am summarizing Neves here. As a slow and inaccurate typist, I prefer to abbreviate. But if it will help:

Pro quo me lernis Ido? Pro quo me uzas e favoras ca linguo?
Se on egardus ca questioni tote objektale, on forsan respondus ke lernar, studiar ed uzar Ido ne valoras la peno, nam la linguo es poke difuzita e rare uzata. Nu, ca objeciono esas forsan komprenebla, ma ol esas anke tro surfacala.
> >3. Idists are like knights errant seeking their fellows
> and spreading culture. They may be few in number,
> How about Jedi Knights?  They were few in number but they
> were very cool and everyone loved them.

Yet again, the picture of knights errant is Neves':

La Idisto do esas vagera kavaliero sempre serchanta altra kavalieri kun blua skudo sur blanka fundo.
Ido: Idiomo di Omni, quankam di poki.

> >So to sum up: I was expressing his views as I
> understand them, not necessarily my own.
> Oh, I rather think you were.

And I rather think you're going out of your way to confirm your paranoid fantasies. It is that attitude that foredooms the more pacific and utopian goals of some auxlangers. Suspicion of those who are different, who dare to disagree, dark inward whispers of conspiracy: there can be no peace as long as such things lurk within us all, which is why God will always have the last laugh at Babel.