I find it interesting that you'd recommend Loglan instead of Lojban. Any reasoning behind that? ki'e .i co'o

I've been anticipating this comment :-) There are a few reasons:

1. I personally think that Loglan is a much more human language. You know, with capital letters and no overuse of the apostrophe.

2. I've been a somewhat active member of the Loglan Institute's mailing list. I still am a member, but I haven't posted anything in over twelve years, I think.

3. Back in the day, I also significantly improved the article about Loglan on the Russian Wikipedia. It had a “Good Article” badge for a few years, until a review found it “not good enough” :-/

4. Like a lot of Loglan-lovers, I think that the circumstances behind Lojban's “forking out” from Loglan are somewhat fishy. IIRC, there was some bad blood between “The Three Old Men” of Loglan and the Le Chevaliers, although my memory of the details is very holey.

I, too, have contributed to Wikipedia, although I don't really find my contributions to GA/FA efforts to have colored my preferences.

I'm not sure what you find "fishy" or "holey"; a trip down memory lane is relatively easy. Lojban's early history explains the "bad blood" very well: James Cooke Brown, inventor of Loglan and head of the Loglan institute, was upset that people wanted to use Loglan in their own ways, without his approval. [0][1] The dispute was so bad that the courts got involved. [2] The Logical Language Group decided that it would be better to fork the language than to deal with Brown's attempts to control the community.

pe'i ko tavla fo lo jbobau fi'o kansa lo se jbobau

Edit: I found lojbab's own words on the fork: https://mw.lojban.org/papri/the_Loglan-Lojban_Dispute

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loglan

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lojban

[2] https://www.casemine.com/judgement/us/5914bf26add7b049347ac5...

There is also Toaq, a similar predicate logic based language. Instead of many particles to modify meaning, it uses a system of 8 tones.

http://toaq.org