Bemused:

Kirilo81:
One must concede that from an articulatorical POW Esperanto is one of the harder planned languages, which on the other hand has the benefit of easily assimilating internationalisms and new lexemes.

Could someone please explain what an articulatorial POW is.
I'm having difficulty believing that someone would want to take an articulated creature (eg millipede) as a Prisoner Of War

Should be "point of view of articulation" or the like, sorry.

The issue with Vaŝingtono can be explained (without technical terms) as follows.

In standard English, speakers would pronounce singing without sounding the 'g', using the same sound as in 'sing' - other speakers (from the North of the UK) would sound the 'g'. But these pronunciations are distinct from the conjunction of n and g in 'I've been going' where, in careful speech, 'n' and the 'g' are both clearly articulated.

To require Esperanto speakers to clearly articulate both the 'n' and the 'g' in a word like Vaŝingtono is to require a level of articulatory gymnastics which is unnatural.

My supposition is that most fluent speakers of Esperanto would pronounce the consonant conjunction common to 'banko' and 'ban-kostumo' differently and that is both natural (less affected) and aids comprehension.

The ng in Vaŝingtono usually ends up pronounced something like ŋ-g. The g doesn't disappear but the n does get nasalized unless you are very careful, and most people aren't that careful.

I normally say /n.g/ since the letters usually exist on the syllable boundary, but in this case, I think it's fine to go /ŋ/, since pretty much any language has the velar nasal, and it is usually phonemically the same as /ng/.