Wut if ur kid’s skool thot this wuz fine spelling?
Then you might respond the same way folks did to the 1977 proposed-but-never-accepted “second round” character simplifications. I mentioned these a couple of posts ago in response to a hand-painted sign that used one of the rejected simplifications (仃 for 停).
Apparently the nu speling wasn’t well received.
Thanks to Zev Handel, who volunteered his scans in the comments, we now have a fuller picture of what was proposed. In the pics below, the simplifications are on the left and the original(s) on the right in brackets.
My guess is everyone’s going to find something to loath here. Even I, the grumbler about all things Hanzi, find myself getting a bit defensive when it comes to replacements like 旦 for 蛋. compare hotels The reaction is visceral and personal — but quite real.
On the other hand, I firmly agree with what Zev said in that same comment:
Had history taken a different turn, we’d be perfectly comfortable using them today.
People learn to live with the script they’ve got, with the social agreement they’ve inherited. If the country had switched to Pinyin back in 1953, today you’d have a new army of Script Defenders, ready to react against any newcomers who wanted to switch back to those reactionary, laobaixing-oppressing old characters.
As it is, feel free to analyze, categorize and react to 第二次汉字简化方案（草案）“Second Round Character Simplification Proposal (Draft)”