Auxlangs also remind me this XKCD comic about standards. Because there's no such thing as "perfect auxiliary language", and once people notice an issue with one, they might create another.
Myself included - I'm not ashamed to say that my first conlang was an auxlang. I handled vocab by importing it from "the big five" (Classical Latin, Attic Greek, Classical Arabic, Sanskrit, Middle Chinese [reconstructed pronunciation])... at least at the start, then I got a bit too recursive and went for Proto-Indo-European, Proto-Semitic and Proto-Sino-Tibetan instead. (It was still "old world-centric" though. In a hindsight I could've used Quechua and Nahuatl.)
All fine and stuff but for which century did you create this conlang? Was your plan to send it back in time?
It was one of those "I'm going to save the world!" auxlangs, so I made it for the then current year. (This was more than a decade ago.)
The reason why I picked those five languages as vocabulary sources was naive thinking - by including non-European prestige languages, I could make it slightly less Eurocentric; and by using classical languages only, I'd be a bit less biased than by using modern languages as vocab source.
Eventually the conlang evolved (or devolved) into a grammar toy. The "classical vocab" is still there, untouched; but now I can use it to explore a bit more potential features for other conlangs, such as verblessness and the likes.
