[lojban] Re: My next suggestion

[Steven Belknap <sbelknap@UIC.EDU>]

On Monday, December 9, 2002, at 08:35  PM, Craig wrote:

> > 4. There is no downside if we have some content for these conlangs, 
> > such as
> > word lists which translate selected LLG Loglan words into these other
> > languages. (First principle of proper keyword selection: there should 
> > be
> > actual content directly relevant to a keyword at the site.)
>
> "stuffing the content of the web pages with the keywords"

Stuffing refers to putting naked keywords, when there is not other 
content relevant to those keywords in the web pages. Generally this is 
done with invisible or very small text for purposes of fooling the 
spiders. Stuffing is no longer very effective. I am proposing something 
quite different: content which is relevant to these other conlangs.

> > My proposal: the ten most popular conlangs should be mentioned on the 
> > LLG
>
> I decline to deal with the multiple problems of this plan. However, one
> quick quetion: Which ten? Many top-ten lists get silly, and include 
> things
> with no actual speakers, such as Nadsat.

I don't see any problems whatsoever. TLI Loglan, Esperanto, klingon, 
Interlingua there's four. Do you know another that is more widely used 
than any of those? (I hope so. I've never heard anybody speak 
Interlingua!) If so, we have five. Only five to go.

> > Hasn't anybody here read the cluetrain manifesto? 
> > http://www.cluetrain.org/
>
> So just because you have a pseudocool name for yourself you are an
> authority?

Umm, what?

-Steven