novatago:Stay here making fun of me, and thinking you have moral right to do so, and to calling me taliban, Hitler, Stalin.

Strictly speaking, I haven’t called you any of those. I did, however, ask, “Who made you the Kim Jong-un of Esperantio?” when you declared that no one had the right to say certain things. But someone who declares from on high what others may and may not say, I expect, must be long hardened to such comparisons by now.

novatago:[lies and the lying liars who tell them]

You mentioned Godwin’s Law earlier when I compared the disproportionately rancorous responses of some people here to innocuous questions about this or that neologism to the disproportionately rancorous responses of some Muslims to perceived slights against Islam. Does that not also apply to you, then, who so often describes everyone you disagree with as a fiulo, aĉulo, and Idistaĉo? And what’s the term for someone who habitually bolsters his argument by characterizing those he disagrees with as lies and tricks?

novatago:Keep lying about how unimportant is this for you and proving your hypocrisy.

I can see how it must look that way. But my issue really is mostly people who proclaim “This issue is forbidden. Go and form your own dialect, fia Idistaĉo.” That kind of bullying arrogance seems to erupt more in response to Esperanto’s eternal gender issue than anything else, which is why we keep having this conversation.

Dum la rajdo infanoj devas esti akompanataj de gepatro.

Children must be accompanied on the ride by a hermaphrodite with blood or guardian relationship to the child.

Of course!

It's true that language reformists aren't generally welcome in Esperanto. Every serious Esperanto speaker will acknowledge that the language isn't perfect, and if you ask nicely, they'll usually tell you which parts of the language they'd have done differently if they were Zamenhof. However, Esperanto speakers have also seen the schisms of the past, and stability is highly prized today. The prevailing view is that since everyone's view of a "perfect" language is different, it is counterproductive and pointless to try to "fix" Esperanto, since everyone's idea of perfection is different. It is generally agreed upon in the community of Esperanto speakers that the perfect is the enemy of the good. Since the language works very well for its purpose in its current form, most Esperanto speakers agree that we should keep speaking it as-is and let it evolve naturally within the rules of the Fundamento (new vocabulary additions are ok, modifications in use of grammar are ok within the limits set by the Fundamento). Anyone interested in comprehensive reform projects, even reforms of relatively "minor" asepcts of the language (like the gender system) has come 100 years too late and should not expect a positive reception.

Furthermore, I should add that a general rule of thumb of these forums that dicussions of reform proposals are heavily frowned upon in the national language subforums. Anyone who wants to discuss changing the language (an idea that is in itself a nonstarter in most of the Esperanto community, but leaving that aside for a minute) should direct herself or himself to the Esperanto subforums. I'll put it this way - if someone isn't even capable of intelligently discussing their ideas on how to 'improve' the language in Esperanto, then this person's knowledge of Esperanto is not considered to be good enough to have a properly informed opinion on what supposedly needs 'improving'.

Most people speak Esperanto because they want to use the language and enjoy it, not spend countless hours dickering over how to improve it. Such Esperanto speakers get quite annoyed by those who keep insisting on changing the language to some untested version (today's Esperanto has worked for more than 100 years). It's going a bit far and I agree that it's a bit rude to say "Go learn Ido" or some such, especially since today's Ido is as stable as today's Esperanto, though Ido started out life as a reform proposal. But it's true that anyone who has their heart set on reform proposals is going to find that Esperantists are not very friendly or welcoming to someone who persistently expresses these ideas, particularly on a website dedicated to teaching traditional normative Esperanto. Such a person would probably be happier talking about his or her ideas with people who are interested in languages in general, not specifically in Esperanto. Unilang might be a good forum for that. Esperanto is really not up for reforms, and anyone who fails to understand this is going to find themselves persistently disappointed and annoyed.