My criticisms have remained consistent from my very first response. I don't know why they seem "constructive" to you only now.
They don't seem constructive, 'tis my point.
I think you have me confused with THEthe. Where have I ever suggested we "shut this discussion down"?
You said, "Let's just shut down the forum then, shall we?"
I'm sorry, but this is where you're simply wrong. The system as it stands cannot apply to all forms because it ignores phonemic distinctions that are found in other varieties of English than the one represented. Before you go further with your project, I highly recommend you read Wells' The accents of English. In particular, his explanation of lexical sets is invaluable to anyone interested in the phonology of English. Even if two dialects have the exact same phoneme inventories, this still doesn't mean these phonemes are distributed identically in each.
I wouldn't say I'm wrote, probably because we can to a large degree find the common ground in which all dialects have, otherwise then we have issues with mutual intelligibility, and I would say we need to start renaming dialects languages. But the system can be different and then converge, or then it can split further, but the system is relevant.
What language uses y for a non-high central vowel other than Welsh? And if compatibility with the "European system" (which I would consider a false generalisation, given the diversity found within Europe) is your goal, then it makes the consonant reassignments I cavilled about earlier even less explicable.
Not everything fit perfectly, I'm aware. Many languages that have a schwa don't have a separate symbol for it, or if they do it's a variation of <e> or <a>. English is very keen on using it a lot, I decided to use some of the leftover symbols for that.
Keeping historical values for combinations of letters doesn't mean keeping historical pronunciations. Modern respellings like donut, lite, and wut are based on the principle of using familiar values in innovative ways. The results are immediately comprehensible to users of the present orthography despite representing a clear break with historical forms.
But we are still so very different, and in a sense people keep saying our language and language skills are fading. There's a whole list of socio-political reasons for that, but my point is, it may be easier with a system that's more consistently spelt to the pronunciation, even if 'tisn't perfect.
French has the changing of c and ç, which tries to preserve spellings which would otherwise change if the vowel changed. English allows such changes as Judge to Judgment without the vowel that changed the sound to begin with. Italian uses <h> to fill in similar spots.
The familiarity argument is worthless when you look at peoples who have up and dropped the way they spelt it to the way they spell it. Like the Romanians, Turks, etc.
However, I think the criticism isn't really helpful. The system in it self works as an alternate writing system. If you don't agree with the particular symbols I used, that's okay, and I respect your opinion here, but it really wasn't what thethe was supposed to put.