I’m a software developer by trade. I study languages as a hobby.
About the title:
The word I wish I could use is “con-parole” as in a “contructed language as it is spoken” to distinguish it from “con-langue” as in a “constructed language that isn’t to be used” But “con-parole” is pretty much unheard of, still, con-parole would cover Esperanto and Klingon, whereas for many people, conlang means Klingon and Elvish, but not Esperanto. Why? I don’t know, I just watch how people use words.
Fake isn’t derogatory. Faux diamonds are quite the good thing in the right context.
Fake isn’t an effort to trigger any particular taxonomy. At least one person has proposed a taxonomy where a “fake langauge” is something akin to a sound effect used in a movie when the script calls for foreign sound, but doesn’t want to use French or invent a language.
I chose the word “Fake” for it’s man-in-the-street meaning, of something that isn’t real on some dimension.