When coming up with a skeme for spelling reform, i fined it useful to go bak on previos drafts and look for things that mite be improoved on.
Wun ov the things that came to mined was the spelling ov wurds like tradittional initially. I spelled it inittially, but then i thought, why not inittialy? Why not systematticaly? This reformed spelling does not concern itself too much with keeping the spelling ov the basic lexical units constant ennyway, as yoo can see from choices like different but diferentiate.
Anuther thing where i cood hav gon further is the use ov silent E to indicate sylabbic consonants, as in double -> duble. Why not go the extra step and spel it dubbel? It wood certanly make things mor consistent, what with wurds like subtle -> suttle and satchel. It wood also make it so silent E oenly indicates a previos long vowel or lexical /s/ or /z/. Maybe this is sumthing that cood be implemented in a second stage ov reform. To lay the groundwurk for that, perhaps we shood spel double -> dubble as wel.
If yoo look at the title ov this post, yoo wil also notice that i spelled your as yor. Thing is, not evrybuddy pronounces this wurd the same. Sum peeple actualy pronounce it “yoor”, which is the reason for the tradittional spelling (compare it with soup). These peeple mite wel be in the minorrity, but wun ov the typpical arguments agenst spelling reform is that orthograffical quirkines protects diversity ov pronunciation: the system being the mes that it is, and with peeple basicly making no conection between the spelling and the pronunciation, the tradittional spelling can be sed to not be endorsing enny speciffic pronunciation. This mite be a good argument if it oenly were true. Spelling pronunciations proov it rong.
What is the alternativ then to just keeping the tradittional spelling in the cases where a wurd has different pronunciations for different speakers? I beleve the best alternativ is to allow for alternativ spellings. To put it simply, to allow both yor and yoor, often and offen, and so on and so forth, with evry speaker folloeing their oen pronunciation in these cases. I beleve alternativ spellings shood be included in enny spelling reform ov English (perhaps Inglish).
To come bak to the aformentioned seccond faze ov reform, such a faze cood also include fazing out the EA spelling ov FLEECE, making speak -> speek, etc.
Finaly, with regard to differently spelled homophones, a lot mor complicated choices remain to be made. But that cood perhaps be the toppic ov anuther poest.
col(l)oquial 