HIP: <Number to be assigned> title: Use an auxiliary neutral language for the registration statements author: ludoviko status: Draft created: 2021-10-24
The aim of this proposal is to add a unique second alternative universal statement “I certify” phrase, for the submission and renewal processes.
Proof of Humanity and the Universal Basic Income emphasizes that income should be a right that is universal for all people disregarding their origin or status. This universality concept could be expanded to the other aspects of the platform. Although being a de facto language spoken in large parts of developed societies and persons that have access and resources to afford quality language education, English is not a universal language. Ideally, users should have an alternative option to English. This second option ideally should not come from any of the current national languages, but a language that can be easily understood and pronounce for both English and non-English speakers alike. This would solve the current limitation of not including peoples native languages and it would remove this need.
Esperanto is a worldwide spoken and well-established neutral universal language, with evidences that it is easy to learn and understand, recognized by UN, so this should be the best second option.
- This proposal is more ideological than practical in nature. It taps on the concept of universality, in the same way that we are making a Universal income.
- The choice of a neutral language is not a popularity contest. We are not choosing it based on the amount of native speakers. The idea of actually not having many speakers is the actual basis for this proposal. The Great Equalizer in this case is that, by design, this would be a language that is foreign to virtually every registered human.
- True meaning of the phrase is not a requirement for (i) saying it, (ii) challenging a submission nor (iii) a juror to decide if the submission is valid.
- This HIP does not pretend to substitute current bussiness-as-usual language and would have zero impact if implemented.
- Esperanto having its roots in indo-european languages, makes its phonemes extremely easy to pronounce to a huge population in the world (for example it has 5 phonetic vowels, while English for example has 14). It is, objectively speaking, easier to pronounce.
- As around 94% of world population that does not speak English as a first language (or 74% second language), native English speakers could resort to the modern tools that non-native speakers use in their everyday life (i.e.: Google Translator).
- There are around 6500 languages in the world. The implementation of the phrase in comparison to a unique, secondary, universal language is much more cost-effective and elegant solution that to extend sequentially more and more languages into the platform.
Many argue that esperanto is not widely known language and therefore it is not a good alternative for the use as a secondary language. The point that is being missed here is that the issue that is attempting to being solved is not dependent on the language populousness (although it is worth noticing that according to conservative estimates, Esperanto surpasses some widely known sub-national dialects like basque or welsh). The popularity is also not a requirement for it to be widely known to be enforceable to wrongly submitted profiles. As stated, phonemes used in esperanto are easily identifiable by any culture, much more easily than English or Mandarin). Any other argument but popularity should be considered for this proposal.