Today I learned +

[Bohandas]

You could change the letter, but you'd still need a new letter to represent the sound, given how extremely important it is to common words in the English language (and is distinct from other sounds), so it'd be a bit of a pointless change.

The idea is to replace it with two "u"s (or two "v"s in the rare cases where that would be more appropriate)

 

[Staffan]

The idea is to replace it with two "u"s (or two "v"s in the rare cases where that would be more appropriate)

Uuhy uuould you do such a thing?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The idea is to replace it with two "u"s (or two "v"s in the rare cases where that would be more appropriate)

That seems superficially to be truly idiotic as a concept and absolutely 100% certain to be actively counterproductive to understanding of and correct pronunciation of English, given w is only ever, ever, ever, ever pronounced that way when describing the letter and at all other times has a sound that is largely unrelated to an English "u" or "uu" sound (it's more similar to that sound in some other languages). And vv isn't even a sound in English! This sort of absolute shenanigans is why ITA caused so many problems!

Like, that's intentional sabotage of your language for the sake pointlessly getting rid of an incredibly widely-used and important letter solely because it offends some aesthetic sense. Unless one can propose a genuine upgrade, the lesson of ITA and countless other linguistic crime sprees is that academics should never be allowed to mess with language. Understand them? Explain them? Sure, awesome. Make or suggest changes? Absolutely not.