The first doubt was around the fact that a language with the pronounciation background coming out of the English language will be "easier" to learn than a stric

The first doubt was around the fact that a language with the pronounciation background coming out of the English language will be "easier" to learn than a strictly phonetic one. Just looking over the list of words in your last link, I'm pretty sure that any number of them would trip someone that is a blank slate. For example: "who", "wheel" and "humour" are vastly inconsistent with regards to how they sound. Having to learn these idiosyncrasies, even for 900 words, would be - in my opinion - more difficult than the basic rules of Esperanto (and Ido, which seems even simpler). I would imagine that coupled with a phonetic transliteration of the common sounds it would be easier but then the language would probably become a different thing all together. I hope that clarifies a bit.