Re: more English orthography

Douglas Koller wrote:
>My two cents: I don't consider myself that old, but I guess I'm a
>curmudgeonly old traditionalist. Words like "thru", "lite", and "nite" are
>so intimately attached to (gimmicky) advertising in my mind ... that aside
from
>experimental poetry, I'd have a hard time dealing with such spellings in a
>serious piece of prose. >
    It may be debatable whether my emails are "serious prose", but I've been
guilty of using _tho_.....

Should they ever become the standard spelling, I
>would rather see it occur as it does now, slowly and naturally over time
>(as, say, "draft" for "draught" or "plow" for "plough"), than through some
>sweeping spelling reform. ...(snip re German)... I would suspect that there
will be, therefore, a generation, maybe two, of spelling mush. And how much
better is that than just letting orthographic nature run its course?
>
>Asbestos donned,>
    The armor of righteousness and, even better, common sense. ;-)