The tragedy of the commons applies to many things, including Esperanto. Products that contain instructions in a number of languages illustrate this, given the existence of Esperanto, because Esperanto ought to be one of the languages, but Esperanto gets crowded out because of the intense pressure to include the maximum number of ethnic languages possible.

What is the translation of that expression in esperanto? Tragedio de komunaĵoj?

Products with many languages on their instruction sheets surely don't end up excluding Esperanto on those grounds. They usually have at least English, German, French and Spanish for the basic reason that there is a likelihood users will understand one of those languages, whereas printing Esperanto is likely a monumental waste of time and ink at this juncture.

A 'tragedy of the commons' situation currently ought to exist per se in Esperanto since it an open 'common' in a time when every atomised individual seemingly has personal vision with regard to everything encountered. Yet it doesn't arise because of an underlying ethos and regulation.

To my mind the so called 'tragedy' is a result of individualism versus cooperation, or at least decent communication upon an agreed value-system between individual agents and groups.

Vestitor:Products with many languages on their instruction sheets surely don't end up excluding Esperanto on those grounds. They usually have at least English, German, French and Spanish for the basic reason that there is a likelihood users will understand one of those languages, whereas printing Esperanto is likely a monumental waste of time and ink at this juncture.

A 'tragedy of the commons' situation currently ought to exist per se in Esperanto since it an open 'common' in a time when every atomised individual seemingly has personal vision with regard to everything encountered. Yet it doesn't arise because of an underlying ethos and regulation.

To my mind the so called 'tragedy' is a result of individualism versus cooperation, or at least decent communication upon an agreed value-system between individual agents and groups.

At this juncture, with friends like you Esperanto doesn't need any enemies.

mkj1887:

At this juncture, with friends like you Esperanto doesn't need any enemies.

I rather resent that. I'm as much a supporter of Esperanto as you are, but I'm also a realist. Your response is baffling.

Vestitor:

mkj1887:

At this juncture, with friends like you Esperanto doesn't need any enemies.

I rather resent that. I'm as much a supporter of Esperanto as you are, but I'm also a realist. Your response is baffling.

My responses to you will be less baffling if you bear in mind that, as I have stated before, I regard you as being an idiotic troll. Of course, I cannot be certain that you are a troll. It may be simply that you have glue for brains.

You say that you are ‘as much a supporter of Esperanto’ as I am, but I am under no obligation to believe you. If you think otherwise, you are succumbing to the Intentional Fallacy.

You imply that the ‘realist’ stance is the right one, at least with regard to Esperanto, but I side with the saying that says that nothing was ever accomplished by a reasonable man.

wikipedia:The tragedy of the commons is an economic theory of a situation within a shared-resource system where individual users acting independently according to their own self-interest behave contrary to the common good of all users by depleting or spoiling that resource through their collective action.

Speaking about Esperanto, which resource exactly is being depleted or spoiled?

mkj1887:

My responses to you will be less baffling if you bear in mind that, as I have stated before, I regard you as being an idiotic troll. Of course, I cannot be certain that you are a troll. It may be simply that you have glue for brains.

You say that you are ‘as much a supporter of Esperanto’ as I am, but I am under no obligation to believe you. If you think otherwise, you are succumbing to the Intentional Fallacy.

You imply that the ‘realist’ stance is the right one, at least with regard to Esperanto, but I side with the saying that says that nothing was ever accomplished by a reasonable man.

I knew it already. You seem to fall back on this slur of 'troll' every time I've questioned what you feel are profound posts.

You must have seen in the other thread that you've misunderstood how an intentional fallacy works? It's necessary to actually be familiar with the workings of something before one invokes it in the rush to appear clever. This is, after all, only an appearance of cleverness. I don't expect you to acknowledge it, just more cries of 'troll!'

Your final 'saying' is quite fitting. You want to accomplish something and you're unreasonable. I could have told you that. From what I've seen, I'm afraid your peculiar vision of Esperanto - replete with spurious and tenuous faux intellectual connections - borders on esoteric crankery.

nornen:
Speaking about Esperanto, which resource exactly is being depleted or spoiled?

Yes. It's perhaps the pertinent question to ask. The whole enquiry and 'problem' seems to me to be fictitious. I suspect that it is the mere application of an exciting-sounding piece of 'theory' where it has no relevance.

nornen:

wikipedia:The tragedy of the commons is an economic theory of a situation within a shared-resource system where individual users acting independently according to their own self-interest behave contrary to the common good of all users by depleting or spoiling that resource through their collective action.

Speaking about Esperanto, which resource exactly is being depleted or spoiled?

If neither Esperanto nor your language is one of those in the instructions, then you are left with the difficult task of using one of those languages to read the instructions, but if Esperanto is one of the languages of the instructions, then the barrier between you and reading the instructions is much less. In the former case the ‘spoilage’ consists of the loss of production that you could have engaged in instead of the time-consuming task of learning another ethnic language. The world is thus materially poorer because of the language barrier, and significantly so, because this scenario is repeated many millions of times on a daily basis.