The other paragraph you have written is a lie

Kia aŭdaco!

You know, you keep showing your hypocrisy and arrogance with this last use of irony, which doesn't bring us anything new except for confirmation that what I wrote is true, while conveniently omitting those other parts of my post which are also true but not so comortable for your pride and ego.

And you are just confirming what I wrote before. Writing to individuals like you is a waste of time.

And yet...why do you still fail to realise that the 'imprecision' is all in your head? I've never read of anything from well-known Esperantists (those who are far in advance of either you or me) complaining that Esperanto's verb system has an inability to convey nuance. It may exist, but I've not seen it yet.

Whose pride and ego is actually being bruised? How is it that nearly all respondents contradicting you are deemed to be a 'waste of time'? You may think you're a misunderstood genius, but I'm less certain.

I am beginning to wonder whether people are responding to a troll. On the internet newsgroup soc.culture.esperanto there is someone who shows up from time to time who contradicts nearly everything anyone says positively about Esperanto. It has almost become a matter of "Don't feed the troll." Here numerous posters have left many messages indicating that the E-o verb system, taken in context, has turned out to be fully, positively adequate for all uses to which it has been put, but the original poster seems not to be willing to consider many (or all) of those arguments.

I'm not keen on branding people as trolls, I'm thinking more along the lines of 'delusions of grandeur'.

Getting back on topic. I think the basic problem is the wording of the question.

Does the simplicity of Esperanto verb tenses make its verbs too imprecise?

The thing is, it doesn't matter how precise or how imprecise a language's verbal forms are, because verbs are just one single gear in the greater machinery of language. The important thing is that a statement, an utterance, a sentence, a text be precise. And in order to achieve a given degree of precision, we do not only need verbs, but the whole machinery working in unison.

We have to examine all the different gears (lexicon, morphology, syntax, phonology, pragmatics, etc) together as a whole, and we cannot pick one single element of the machinery and deem it precise or imprecise, adequate or inadequate.

EN: I smoke. I am smoking.
DE: Ich rauche. I rauche gerade.

In this example English encodes more information in the verb[1], while German conveys the same information by means of an adverb. My point is, that not all languages encode the same feature on the same gears. Concerning verbal morphology, some languages encode the subject (llamo, llamas, llama), others encode the object (xinril, xatril, xril), some encode passive (vocor, vocaris, vocatur), some encode medium (βούλομαι, synes), some encode anti-passive (xin'ilok, xat-ilok, x'ilok), some encode negation (飲まない), some encode tense (do, did), some encode aspect, some encode movement, some encode....
However if a given language doesn't encode a certain feature by means of verbal morphology, this same feature will be represented elsewhere (syntax, nominal morphology, lexicon, ...). No information is lost and the same degree of precision is maintained.

As long as an utterance, a text, a scientific paper in Esperanto (or any language) can achieve the same degree of precision as English (or any other language), it does not matter at all whether the information is encoded in verb forms or adverbs or stress or word order or tone or choice of vocabulary.

Polish has seven cases. Esperanto has two. Does the simplicity of Esperanto's declension make its nouns too imprecise? No, it doesn't. The information is just hidden somewhere else, mostly in prepositions.
Japanese inflects adjectives for tense and negation. Esperanto doesn't. Does the simplicity of Esperanto's adjectives make its adjectives too imprecise? No, it doesn't. The information is just hidden somewhere else, mostly in auxiliary verbs.
Q'eqchi' inflects nouns for alienable and inalienable possession. Esperanto doesn't. Does the simplicity of Esperanto's nouns make its nouns too imprecise? No, it doesn't.

One mustn't take one single gear or spring or odd metal bit from a disassembled watch and claim that this single piece is too simple for measuring time. (No, I am not a creationist.)

So if any, the question should read "Does the simplicity of Esperanto (in its wholeness) make it too imprecise?"
I personally answer nay.

----
[1] Actually it doesn't. "Am smoking" is periphrastic, which is half way between morphology and syntax, leaning a bit more toward syntax.

Do compound tenses in Esperanto actually add more precision, or do they just sow more misunderstandings?

The basic problem is, that there is no real consensus what the compound tenses mean. The first question is whether the participles express aspect or relative tense. There have been lengthy discussion about this on lernu. (For instance, Bertilo Wennergren interprets the participles as both temporal and aspectual in the lernu grammar, while Kirilo argued that they show relative tense. Kirilo please correct me if I misquoted you.)

The more important aspect however is, whether the reader (or listener) is able to decode the fine meaning the writer (or speaker) put into the compound tenses.

Several languages have compound tenses, for example one compound tense formed by an auxiliary verb (mostly something like esti or havi) and a nominal form of a verb (participle, infinitive, other):

I saw. - I have seen.
Ich sah. - Ich habe gesehen.
Je vis. - J'ai vu.
Vidi. - Ho visto.
Vi. - He visto.
Vidi (classical). - Habeo vistum (vulgaris).
Mi vidis. - Mi estas vidinta.

Now the problem is that the compound forms don't necessarily mean the same in the different languages. In German, Italian, French and Latin the only difference is either the register of the speech or the region of the speaker. In these languages both forms can be used almost interchangeably. However in English and Spanish there is a strict difference in meaning between the two forms; you cannot replace one with the other. Even worse: the English "I have seen" cannot be mapped exactly onto the Spanish "he visto", or vice versa.

And this is what I fear can give rise to misunderstanding.

Let's say an American Spanish speaker (YMMV in Europe) wants to say in Esperanto (a) "no lo hice" and (b) "no lo he hecho" (two different meanings). An inexperienced Esperantist might then jump to a hasty conclusion: "Hey, Esperanto has a verbal form "estas farinta" which looks quite like "he hecho", so for (a) I will use "mi ne faris ĝin" and for (b) I will use "mi ne estas farinta ĝin". And he might be even proud of himself for having expressed this fine distinction so neatly. However, big however, will the German, English, Polish or Japanese Esperantist who reads these two sentences be able to guess the intended difference? Or will the information just be lost?

Or translating "I realised, that I had been being watched" as "Mi eksciis, ke mi estis estanta/inta rigardata/ita." might not have the desired effect.

Whenever someone tried to put information about aspect or aktionsart into compound tenses, in my opinion, they should double-check whether an arbitrary reader will be able to get the intended meaning. If there is even a minuscule doubt that the reader might not get this information, it might be better to stick to simple tenses and adverbs or to rephrase the whole sentence. Just my two cents.

Are there occasions where the usage of compound tenses is indispensable in Esperanto?

nornen:Do compound tenses in Esperanto actually add more precision, or do they just sow more misunderstandings?
...

I don't think I am at the level in Esperanto to make a full judgement about how useful the compound tenses are, but they seem to offer the same sorts of double-take uncertainty as similar constructions in other languages I know. This is especially so when I read through people's posts and think to myself: 'I'd have understood it to mean the same thing if you'd just used a simple verb or construction'. Then again there is the obvious problem (which the OP rather inflated) that I may just be failing to see why the construction was chosen and therefore missing some nuance.

On the whole though I feel the simple tenses make for clearer understanding and there is too much emphasis placed upon trying to pack as much meaning as possible into small packages. It means you spend about as much time unravelling all that meaning as you would just having a few more explanatory sentences. This is not just an issue for Esperanto.

I don't think "I realised, that I had been being watched" even has the desired effect in English. It is clunky in the way "I had had three cups of tea' is. It ought to be a relief really when people realise that such tenses can add more confusion than meaning. Law of diminishing returns in some cases.

【微信QQ1757724367】办理毕业证成绩单文凭、修改成绩、教育部学历学位认证、毕业证、成绩单、文凭、学历文凭、毕业证文凭、毕业文凭、文凭毕业证、毕业证认证、留服认证、使馆认证、使馆公证、使馆证明、使馆留学回国人员证明、留学生认证、学历认证、文凭认证、学位认证、留学生学历认证、留学生学位认证、使馆认证（留学回国人员证明）、学生卡（证）、雅思托福成绩单、在读证明、录取通知书offer、驾照等 留学归国服务中心：实体公司，注册经营，行业标杆，精益求精！ 为英国、加拿大、澳洲、新西兰、美国、法国、德国、新加坡等国
1.收集客户基本信息！
2.客户支付30%的订金，公司出电子图给客户审核，确保信息无误！
3.根据客户审核后的电子图制作成品再次给客户审核！
4.客户支付完余款，公司把成品邮寄给客户！（国内顺丰 国外DHL）
四：合理推荐业务：
1.如果您只是为了的应付父母亲戚朋友，那么办理一份学位即可
2.如果您是为了回国找工作，只是进私营企业或者外企，那么办理一份学位即可，因为私营企业或者外企是不能查询学位真假的！
3.如果您是要进国企 银行 事业单位 考公务员等就需办理真实教育部学历认证！明办理咨询。基于国内鼓励留学生回国就业、创业的政策，以及大批留学生归国立业之大优势。本公司一直朝着智力密集型的方向转型，建立了一个专业化的由归国留学生组成的专业顾问团队为中心，公司核心部分包括：咨询服务部门、营销部门、运作部、顾问团队共同协作的服务体系。
★业务选择办理准则★
一、工作未确定，回国需先给父母、亲戚朋友看下文凭的情况，办理一份就读学校的毕业证文凭即可
二、回国进私企、外企、自己做生意的情况，这些单位是不查询毕业证真伪的，而且国内没有渠道去查询国外文凭的真假，也不需要提供真实教育部认证。鉴于此，办理一份毕业证即可
三、进国企，银行，事业单位，考公务员等等，这些单位是必需要提供真实教育部认证的，办理教育部认证所需资料众多且烦琐，所有材料您都必须提供原件，我们凭借丰富的经验，快捷的绿色通道帮您快速整合材料，让您少走弯路。
★关于教育部学历认证的小知识：
国外学历学位认证，作为留学生回国后就业、落户、升学必须提交的证明材料，国家虽然没有明文的规定，留学生回国后必须办理，属于自愿行为，不强制要求。但是根据国家部委和国务院学位办的相关规定：留服认证是留学生回国报考公务员，进入国家机关、事业单位，高等教育考试，大型外企等入职时必须提供的国外文凭的证明材料，不仅关系着留学生回国后的就业，更是影响着落户、升学，甚至留学生往后申请海外高层次人才科研启动基金的有力凭据。

如果您处于一下几种情况：
1：留学期间由于种种原因没有毕业，无法获得加拿大大学毕业证书。
2：留学生取得学历的学校不被国家教育部认可，因此取得的学历学位也不会被认可。
3：留学生提供的认证材料不真实，不完整（缺少Study Permit和出入境Visa）。
4：留学生在加拿大的学习居留时间不符合标准。
5：留学生前置学历存在问题，不被教育部认可。
6：留学生存在转学分的情况，转学分不被认可。
如果您处于以上几种情况，自己贸然去申请认证,您必然不会被通过，甚至连递交材料都无法完成，教育部留服不会受理。更有甚者，因为您提供假的材料，最后被拉入认证黑名单，以后再想认证，简直是比登天还难了。
★专业为您服务，更多关于“ 教育部学历认证 ”的信息，请通过下面方式联系我；
******Chris为您服务： Q Q/微信：1757724367
选择实体注册公司办理，更放心，更安全！我们的承诺：可来公司面谈，可签订合同，会陪同客户一起到教育部认证窗口递交认证材料，客户在教育部官方认证查询网站查询到认证通过结果后付款，不成功不收费！”

【微信QQ1757724367】办理毕业证成绩单文凭、修改成绩、教育部学历学位认证、毕业证、成绩单、文凭、学历文凭、毕业证文凭、毕业文凭、文凭毕业证、毕业证认证、留服认证、使馆认证、使馆公证、使馆证明、使馆留学回国人员证明、留学生认证、学历认证、文凭认证、学位认证、留学生学历认证、留学生学位认证、使馆认证（留学回国人员证明）、学生卡（证）、雅思托福成绩单、在读证明、录取通知书offer、驾照等 留学归国服务中心：实体公司，注册经营，行业标杆，精益求精！ 为英国、加拿大、澳洲、新西兰、美国、法国、德国、新加坡等国
1.收集客户基本信息！
2.客户支付30%的订金，公司出电子图给客户审核，确保信息无误！
3.根据客户审核后的电子图制作成品再次给客户审核！
4.客户支付完余款，公司把成品邮寄给客户！（国内顺丰 国外DHL）
四：合理推荐业务：
1.如果您只是为了的应付父母亲戚朋友，那么办理一份学位即可
2.如果您是为了回国找工作，只是进私营企业或者外企，那么办理一份学位即可，因为私营企业或者外企是不能查询学位真假的！
3.如果您是要进国企 银行 事业单位 考公务员等就需办理真实教育部学历认证！明办理咨询。基于国内鼓励留学生回国就业、创业的政策，以及大批留学生归国立业之大优势。本公司一直朝着智力密集型的方向转型，建立了一个专业化的由归国留学生组成的专业顾问团队为中心，公司核心部分包括：咨询服务部门、营销部门、运作部、顾问团队共同协作的服务体系。
★业务选择办理准则★
一、工作未确定，回国需先给父母、亲戚朋友看下文凭的情况，办理一份就读学校的毕业证文凭即可
二、回国进私企、外企、自己做生意的情况，这些单位是不查询毕业证真伪的，而且国内没有渠道去查询国外文凭的真假，也不需要提供真实教育部认证。鉴于此，办理一份毕业证即可
三、进国企，银行，事业单位，考公务员等等，这些单位是必需要提供真实教育部认证的，办理教育部认证所需资料众多且烦琐，所有材料您都必须提供原件，我们凭借丰富的经验，快捷的绿色通道帮您快速整合材料，让您少走弯路。
★关于教育部学历认证的小知识：
国外学历学位认证，作为留学生回国后就业、落户、升学必须提交的证明材料，国家虽然没有明文的规定，留学生回国后必须办理，属于自愿行为，不强制要求。但是根据国家部委和国务院学位办的相关规定：留服认证是留学生回国报考公务员，进入国家机关、事业单位，高等教育考试，大型外企等入职时必须提供的国外文凭的证明材料，不仅关系着留学生回国后的就业，更是影响着落户、升学，甚至留学生往后申请海外高层次人才科研启动基金的有力凭据。

如果您处于一下几种情况：
1：留学期间由于种种原因没有毕业，无法获得加拿大大学毕业证书。
2：留学生取得学历的学校不被国家教育部认可，因此取得的学历学位也不会被认可。
3：留学生提供的认证材料不真实，不完整（缺少Study Permit和出入境Visa）。
4：留学生在加拿大的学习居留时间不符合标准。
5：留学生前置学历存在问题，不被教育部认可。
6：留学生存在转学分的情况，转学分不被认可。
如果您处于以上几种情况，自己贸然去申请认证,您必然不会被通过，甚至连递交材料都无法完成，教育部留服不会受理。更有甚者，因为您提供假的材料，最后被拉入认证黑名单，以后再想认证，简直是比登天还难了。
★专业为您服务，更多关于“ 教育部学历认证 ”的信息，请通过下面方式联系我；
******Chris为您服务： Q Q/微信：1757724367
选择实体注册公司办理，更放心，更安全！我们的承诺：可来公司面谈，可签订合同，会陪同客户一起到教育部认证窗口递交认证材料，客户在教育部官方认证查询网站查询到认证通过结果后付款，不成功不收费！”