Simply put, retrospectively C++ was far too complicated for me; I only found that out after adjusting to lisps, i dont feel like going back at all.

even then, i would like to prefer scheme to common lisp as my needs do not fit the purposes of CL (to unify lisp dialects)

Here is a video expressing my opinions on this stuff:
"Stop Writing Dead Programs" by Jack Rusher (Strange Loop 2022) (edit: I have managed to use the wrong video title. sorry.)

so because people still like this crosshair apparently (thanks guys); I setup a magnet link to make it easier to keep it alive long term.

Well it's here now.

That link was never sent to you in the first place, so why fucking complain?

and since my reading skills aint fucking good enough for you apparently, how about you just read it yourself?

since my debate skills arent good enough for you (or you all), maybe just leave me the fuck alone.

1. Age isn't important here: what's important is that this article states that Ethnologue started as a christian group focused on the bible.

That is a religious link (even if outdated) is it not?

My complaint was about ethnologue's database being paywalled, hence not being transparent; which necessarily affects the sources I can get off that site.

I don't use fucking google translate; that butchers Esperanto horribly. (examples: using "konservita" instead of "savita" when saving a person, "kaŝmemorigita" instead of "rapidmemorigita" to refer to caching)
and I cannot speak Spanish, nor Japanese now (which I attempted to study and indeed could barely speak it).

What? Are you even gonna explain your reasoning? (Mind you, you don't even speak or read the language yourself.)

So now all of a sudden, when I cite you a link by an esperantist himself doing proper study, you starting screeching about "no validity". You keep complaining to me to "read my own sources", yet you can't even fairly read my sources I give to you.

http://claudepiron.free.fr/articlesenanglais/europeanorasiatic.htm

https://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/19/science/how-linguists-and-missionaries-share-a-bible-of-6912-languages.html

How is the Washington post article "not relevant"?

Here: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/world-s-largest-linguistics-database-getting-too-expensive-some-researchers, I cited this earlier too.
Also this: https://humans-who-read-grammars.blogspot.com/2019/11/ethnologue-changes-access-again.html

so yes I did cite my sources, earlier, but i probably should have linked it to the post where I first said the first source.

I can just repeat the same greeting again, but very slowly. (i didn't agree to use that particular sentence, it'd be too long.)

Also, everyones biased to an extent, my dude (me included). humans are not soulless beings; we have emotions from our primitive days. However I've backed up most of my claims with sources starting from early in the thread.

Also, the entire grammar and letters of Esperanto can be read in just 1 (yes, 1) page: https://www.akademio-de-esperanto.org/fundamento/gramatiko_angla.html . so I'm founded on actual evidence in this regard (and not just using clickbait scumbag tactics like, hyping up chinese to be easy focusing on the grammar, only for the beginner to get crushed down by ideograms.

In particular, if I had the resources, I would actually like to create an experiment in regards to competitive gaming, about the influence of language on processing time.

well, this site is still worthless. still hates me, and I have no reason to go into comp. if I could leave or delete my account on this website, I'd absolutely do it.

In any case: the real problem with Ethnologue is that they are: 1. Christian and 2. Colonial

Also, there is (unsurprisingly) problems with them regarding the transparency of their sources. which is a big red flag.

Also to eddiiee once again, about the ethnologue source:

I think this is what you were referring to: https://www.ethnologue.com/insights/most-spoken-language/ (of course, you didn't give me a single direction to help, if this is the case. lol.)
and here's an older statistics page on their sizes: https://web.archive.org/web/20180630183842/https://www.ethnologue.com/statistics/size

Ethnologue cites English as the worlds largest native (not spoken) language; mandarin as the worlds largest language. Wait no, they're switched. Help! how do I delete this reply? Shit I can't. I hate these shitty forum websites.

I didn't think such a thing. I was trying to talk about native speakers of english, not u.s. There are native speakers of english outside the united states.

And anyway, what the hell does it have to do with my point? My point was supposed to be that there was a functional illiteracy rate in english in the first place, not that it was segregated to only americans and not foreign-language learners.

I FUCKING DID YOU PIECEE OF SHIT!

and you people are fucking cruel to hate on someone like me, when you didnt even try to study it yourself.

---

but, thank you, for at least trying to read one of my sources for once, and not just fucking ignoring them. not that it fucking matters anymore.

I did not mention any of the those words in the aforementioned quote; only the sources mentioned those terms (yes, I didn't think about the hispanics mentioned. sorry about that.)

and None of the fucking responders here where honest in the first place!

I'm not:

I did not mention "american" nor "usonian" here. I only mentioned "native speakers".

Indeed. I think that term should be used more often, as it's much more appropriate. of course, that means that most of the world is logically illiterate in English, because they cant comprehend it; that doesn't immediately mean it's bad for them (remember colonialism?), just that it's important to take note of context.

Also, found that PBS is saying that 36%of U.S citizens are illiterate in English.

Social/education is the base of such problems, but the language itself certainly can impede progress to literacy, depending on its structure. (Example can be English: with it's massive amount of exceptions.)

In Esperanto, functional illiteracy is unheard of, because of the easiness of our language.

what was bad about it in the first place?

lol yeah. English is also the same language that has a 18% illiteracy rate in native speakers.[1][2]

jes, vi pravas.