2Slonysh
Intriguing, indeed. Did our domestic linguists quickly come up with this interpretation (I doubt that many linguists were among the "padonki" who participated in the creation of the dialect)? Or is this your own invention?

I don't know if they were linguists or "padonki," or linguists who were also "padonki," but it certainly wasn't me. By the way, I have often encountered the opinion that the founders of "olbansky" were very educated people who followed their own rules of language distortion just as meticulously as we follow the original rules of Russian. In all my years online, I have only met a couple of people who wrote in genuine "olbansky," and they clearly followed certain rules. Moreover, these people were very educated and erudite... only few could see that behind the collection of "ashibki" (typos).
By the way, here is a funny, although controversial, link regarding the rules of "gramatika": link.:smile04:

I heard about phonetic writing back in school, but in my humble opinion, "olbansky" is too hypertrophied and distorted a form of it, if it is at all. After all, "all 4 u" really does sound like "all for your," and "ICQ" sounds like "I seek your." But it is often much more difficult to pronounce a phrase in "olbansky" than in Russian.

In my opinion, it is difficult to pronounce a phrase in "prevede" (a deliberately incorrect way of saying "in advance"). And if you take "olbansky," the much-hyped word "afftar" (author), if pronounced without affected emphasis, sounds absolutely natural. Or take the common "ya" (I) - this is pure phonetics...:)