Did you just invoke your own death to bolster your position?
Bob. We want to fix some things in the language within a realistic timeframe as to benefit from them without spending years doing uselessly tautological work to reflect in materials that we will shortly after rewrite, reflect a very out of date version of the language. How is it possible that we're talking about all these odd topics that don't seem to connect with solving that problem?
Its like, the problem is simple, the solution is simple, and lots of people agree. If you stop this odd debate of trying to make us out to be some sort of insignificant traitors or untrue scotsmen, you might see that the things that have changed do improve the language and make things cleaner and more elegant and more useful for speech and communication.
That improving the prescription more immediately to reflect modern usage, so that we can better go on teaching and advocating the language, is even contentious is boring. The debate is tired and apparently the arguments have become very weak. And odd. You made some odd arguments Bob. That don't really address the problem at all.
The dogmas serve no one except those who are more interested in debating dogma and process rather than teaching lojban to new people and making sure the language is digestible and effective. You need to start speaking to realistic and practical short term solutions for those out there teaching and using the language. But I don't expect that to happen. Just reflect on the character of your tone and content. I don't realistically see you changing your mind and saying things that are actually realistic in helping solving our problems. Because of course we don't exist, and probably don't even speak "Lojban" as it could be officially called anyway right?
Why are we not the first group to come along and suggest such editorializing of the language? Its because the language does not exist as just some mental object.