u/NotSteve1075

In an old thread, u/Adept_Situation3090 and I were discussing what we'd most like to see in a "perfect" shorthand system. For those who have recently joined this board, and for those who don't scroll back through old threads, I'll tell what I think would be most desirable to me. We all have different tastes and preferences, of course -- so let me know in the comments which ones you agree with and which ones you don't.

But I think most of us who find the subject of shorthand to be endlessly fascinating are always looking for the PERFECT system. I know that, when I explore a new system, I'm always evaluating it, thinking, "Well, I like that he does this -- but I don't like that he does that..." Which is partly why I keep flipping from system to system almost every week, depending on which one(s) I've just written about!

What would the perfect system be? For me, it would have the following characteristics:

1. No shading for any reason. I don't like shading, and never have, partly because it is hard to find a writing implement that will indicate it clearly. It adds unnecessary stress to the hand, with some strokes light and some heavier. And reading back, you always have to wonder if any stroke is DARKER or LIGHTER.
2. No positions to indicate vowels. Some systems use as many as FIVE positions relative to the line to indicate vowels, which can be tricky to observe. Pitman uses three positions, to suggest a RANGE of vowels -- but it doesn't tell you exactly WHICH vowel it is, nor where it goes in the word. (I'd accept limited use of positions to indicate things like prefixes and suffixes that cover a large number of similar words. For example, the disjoined T before an outline in Gregg, covers a lot of words.)
3. Inline vowels written. A perfect system would have distinct strokes at least for the five vowels. It would be nice if it could indicate WHICH variety of A or E or whatever it is -- but we're used to doing that already in English. (For example, "read" could be pronounced RED or REED, depending on the context.)
4. A LIMITED number of short forms. It makes good sense to have special short forms for the most common words in English, so that such frequently written words take the least amount of time possible. IMO, a few dozen would be ideal. But when a system has hundreds and HUNDREDS of short forms, that's admitting that the system isn't brief enough by itself.
5. Simple and logical rules. In shorthand, SIMPLE IS ALWAYS BETTER. When you're struggling to keep up with something, an array of special techniques for shortening a word can be a hindrance, not a help. And if those rules pile up, resulting in different outlines, depending on which order you apply them in, you're asking for trouble. You'll be struggling to figure out every word -- or you'll just memorize outlines for words, which is not a SYSTEM.
6. Ideally, I think each stroke should be unique, not depending on length or shading for distinction. Absent that, I would accept having only TWO degrees of length as being acceptable, one very short and one noticeably longer, so each stroke is immediately recognizable at first glance.
7. I consider speed potential a plus. It's nice not to have limits on what speed you might be able to reach, if you're so inclined. HOWEVER, bearing in mind that not all of us need limitless SPEED, when we use shorthand for our own notes and memoranda, I'd say that more IMPORTANT is complete legibility at any point after writing. With a penwritten system, it's inevitable that we'll need CONTEXT, to some degree -- which we're also used to in reading English (see "read" above), but the less we need context, the better.
8. The writing should reflect how words are said not spelled. If you write what you HEAR, you'll be fine. When you read it back, you read what you wrote and there it is! We shouldn't have to be wondering whether a word is spelled with an E, or an EE, or an EA, or an EI -- which can slow you down disastrously, when you're struggling to keep up with something. (English spelling is a nonsensical MESS.)

If anyone says they can't read "cold notes", it tells you that either they didn't write things properly, or they write a system that's incomplete, such as leaving out ALL THE VOWELS! You should always be able to read a full sentence in your shorthand system, no matter how long ago you wrote it. (Isolated words are always harder to read, but that's inevitable.)

We need to remember that there are ENTIRE BOOKS written in some systems -- which tells us that those systems are LEGIBLE FOREVER, by people who weren't there when the shorthand was written.