Forum:Conlang Featuring

Discuss which one to feature on the front page here

Not sure how things work? Go here Honoured Languages

 Dangin Nira   won this months! you may until the 21st of april nominate new ones before its closed, then for a week voting (also during nomination) may take place, on 28th it closes

Discussion
How come someone who's running can put multiple cons? —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 19:30, April 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * Go ahead adn do it yourself too, as long as its not across all it has satistical weight The Emperor Zelos 21:15, April 17, 2010 (UTC)
 * I am rather confused by the rules here. So if one's running they cannot "vote", but can put the "cons", and those have "statistical weight"? That's weird, and makes this all look like a crap shooting contest :( :( Adagio burner 21:58, April 17, 2010 (UTC)
 * Elemantery dear watson, You may not post a pro vote on yourself nor put con votes on everyone else, as that will be considered a form of self voting, and if youre not nominated adn vote down all aswell it still will not matter because all are given same minus. You place as a nominee max of 2 cons (or 3 if you want to con yourself for some odd reason) and any amount of pros The Emperor Zelos 22:03, April 17, 2010 (UTC)
 * Still not clear. "You may not post a pro vote on yourself nor put con votes on everyone else" seems to contradict with "You place as a nominee max of 2 cons". But whatever, I am not really interested in inventing reasons to hate all conlangs except my own and posting them as cons :( Adagio burner 23:59, April 17, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thats why you cant vote all to be con, you must always leave one to be either neutral or pro so the relative stats changes The Emperor Zelos 00:12, April 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * You can vote on any language except your own.--Koppadasao 22:01, April 17, 2010 (UTC)

Why can't admins vote except for tiebreakers? —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 21:20, April 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * Because we got suffient power as it is to do things while this is meant to reflect the communitys oppinion and theirs soley, due to small numbers of active people, so far 2 people voting, the vote of an admin weights too greately if there had been 12+ ours would drown more and we could join in. The Emperor Zelos 21:39, April 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * Admins are part of the community! —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 22:15, April 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * With the most power in a small community, I believe this to be the fairest method of ensuring those with power do not abuse it in anyway. The Emperor Zelos 22:17, April 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * I very strongly disagree. The difference is that we make the final decision, and we can edit MediaWiki, and delete and protect pages. Why would we abuse it. Especially here, we just do the same thing as the other users are doing and we are fine doing what the other users are doing. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 23:00, April 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * How about you change 'Admins' to 'EmperorZelos' because I really want to vote. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 23:01, April 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * Why is voting so desperate for you anyway? Besides as for that we can just make an admin less >P The Emperor Zelos 23:10, April 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * Because I want to have a voice in what langs are getting featured. Why is it so important for you to not have admins voting anyway? —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 23:31, April 17, 2010 (UTC)

What i deem to be fair The Emperor Zelos 23:32, April 17, 2010 (UTC)

Admin Votes
To settle a discussion, does the people on this community that is NOT admin want the admins ot cast votes aswell? Until this is resolved admins remain non participents The Emperor Zelos 23:39, April 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't see why not. Why would thier options be less valuable than eveyone else's? Letting admins vote does not seem to give them any unfair disadvantage. Adagio burner 00:03, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

See? I'm going to restore my changes right now. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 00:16, April 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * One is not suffient in so short time


 * Either 3 or 4 will agree ,excluding yourself, without disagreement or this topic remains open for 5 days so people get a chance to voice their oppinion. If the agreement outweights disagreement then you are correct The Emperor Zelos 00:20, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

Redo rules
I've been listening to the discussion for a while, and I suggest a complete redo of the rules: That's it. Just 3 rules for the whole deal.
 * Every member, except bot has the right to give a single vote for a single language, after giving a summary of their opinion of the nominated languages.
 * One cannot vote for a language one is the author or major contributer of, or give an opinion for such a language.
 * One may nominate any language, but the nomination has to have a description of why you nominate the language.

--Koppadasao 00:30, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

I like these rules. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 00:34, April 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * Sounds to me like you spotted the same problem with pro/con-voting that I'm having trouble with. --Koppadasao 00:44, April 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * I prefer pro/con because of simplicity. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 00:47, April 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * Pro/Con-voting doesn't give you the option of giving a real critique of each nominated language, as you are limited by the self-voting rule, as each critique you're writing changes the dynamics of the votes.


 * Just having a single vote, you are freer to give negative critiques for each of the languages, as the summary doesn't change the dynamics. Only the final vote counts for the featuring, while your critique has value only for the author and the reader.--Koppadasao 00:55, April 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * I propose allowance of critiques while keeping votes illegal to own languages. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 01:01, April 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * Which is being taken care of and so far you seem to be winning on fair grounds, If no one oppose I will agree as a good Admin to let those be the rules The Emperor Zelos 00:37, April 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * I just wanted to vote. But you keep reverting, so I have to change the rules. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 00:47, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

Untill it passes according to what i said your votes are nulled, as said, 5 days or 2-3 more agreeing with you and your vote is counted (well before the dead line of 28th). When that occure your side have won this democraticly and fairly in which that will be the standard. Until that point the system of the previous month applies. The Emperor Zelos 03:50, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

No, it is clearly against not allowing admins to vote. If you want to be a tiebreaker, fine. But I'm not, deal with it. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 12:20, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

Nominations:
Nominate a language by adding it to the bottom of this list: I am nominating this because I find to be a very unique, nicely sounding/looking and interesting conlang (created by Adagio burner). It is a very good example of a conlang practically completely made up from the ground up. With Dangall featured, I will again nominate Delang, now about to be set in the same world as Dangall. Delang has an easy grammar and pronunciation, making it easier to learn and speak. (No need for your tongue to do contortions, in other words.)--Koppadasao 09:38, March 26, 2010 (UTC) Mis Hio is a close relative to Hi, using the same basic concepts and root dictionary. It does away with long words of Hi, making it a more readable and better looking conlang. After I got some feedback on Hi being hard to read and pronounce I decided that I wanted a language that could be easily learned and used by I many, so now I switched my development efforts to Mis Hio.
 * Hi
 * Delang
 * Mis Hio


 * -- Adagio burner 18:05, March 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * Qâêr
 * I am nominating this conlang because I find it to be very interesting, uniquely constructed and also a beauttiful language with a beautiful script. It is created by akvii and is a very interesting langauge with many unique features that cannot be seen in lnaguages such the IE family. It is a good conlang and though not yet completed, is a great piece of work and linguistic art.


 * Thiskish
 * I am nominating my conlang because although I am still finishing up on minor grammar (I have moderate and major done), I think it is nice and I can write sentences, making up words and putting them up into the dictionary as I go (except when they are already in the dictionary. I would appreciate input! =) —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 21:20, April 17, 2010 (UTC)

Voting Rules
To make things clear, you can start voting before the 21st and until the last day (28th) change the votings whenever your heart so pleases. You will vote con or pro for a language, you don't have to do both, if you think it has only con then you vote con and describe why its con or pro. The rules will be these thought:
 * 1) EmperorZelos is a tiebreaker.
 * 2) Self voting does not count to the total (There are far too few of us to dilute the effect).
 * 3) Pro vote on oneself is self vote
 * 4) Con vote on everyone else is self vote
 * 5) You may vote cons on all but one as a non-nominee, as nominee it is all but two. Pro votes may go to all but ones own conlang
 * 6) Unregistered voters don't count, but are welcome to post comments and such.
 * 7) Try voting what you think looks best, realisitc, plausible etc.
 * 8) Bots (ZeBot and Fakultinj) cannot vote at all.

Voting

 * Hi
 * Con: The script [no offence] is an eyesore, serioursly the people would be plagued with dislexia trying to read/write it. vii April 16, 2010
 * Pro: A little bit Latin-sounding, quite efficient. A little heavy on the vowels, but other than that, not half bad. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 01:52, April 17, 2010 (UTC)
 * Delang
 * Mis Hio
 * Con: [At least in my opinion] the way roots and words join together in sentences in confusing in the sense of the letters and words being negated, this makes for confusing reading. I think this could be either explained better or represented in a better way. viiApril 16, 2010
 * I won't put my con here but I tend to find languages with really short words redundant because there are too many spaces. Chinese does not have spaces so I'm fine with that. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 01:52, April 17, 2010 (UTC)
 * Qâêr
 * Pro: The script is beautiful. I like the flow of the strokes. The language is quite vocalic. That makes me believe that it can be a very pleasant language to listen to. Look forward to listening to audio samples if there is any in the future. --Deslee 00:11, April 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * Pro: Beautiful script, and it looks very usable. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 23:32, April 17, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thiskish

Count:

 * Hi: 0
 * Delang: 0
 * Mis Hio: -1
 * Qâêr: 2
 * Thiskish: 0