This is what I was talking about – and people who use "olban" simply don't know how to write properly. As a reminder, the rules of "olban" involve distortion based on the principle of "not how it's written, but how it's heard" wherever possible. That's why, for example, in the word "nas" (us), the "s" changes to "z" – because before a vowel, sibilant consonants sound like voiced consonants.

I'm not very good at "olban," but you're definitely exaggerating with "how it's heard" and "wherever possible." I doubt anyone hears "eshche" (still) as "ishcho." And the concept of "how it's heard" is quite subjective. As chemists say when arguing about the color of a product, it all depends on the degree of color blindness. Therefore, many words allow for different spellings, but not all and not always, although I might have misunderstood something. In my not-so-long life, I've had the opportunity to study 5 languages (although with VERY different results), and I've come to the conclusion that the purer and more diverse a language is in its execution, the more beautiful it is. Therefore, "olban" can go "to hell."