Which of the three is the superior choice for representing /θ/ and /ð/ in the Latin script?

Which of the three is the superior choice for representing /θ/ and /ð/ in the Latin script?
Examples using "thin" (/θ/) and "this" (/ð/):
1. Þin þin, Ðis ðis
2. Ŧin ŧin, Đis đis
3. Thin thin, Dhis dhis

Attached: Th.png (695x263, 7.18K)

3 because im not autistic

th

no need to reinvent the wheel

đough

why are we so phobic when it comes to making writing and communication more efficient? Ðere is literally no reason to use 'th' over 'ð'. Ðe alphabet is retarded to begin wið, but for ðe love of God, if you can say shit ðe same way wið less characters, why shouldn't you?
why are we so φobic when it comes to making writing and communication more eφicient? Ðere is literally no reason to use 'ph' over 'φ'. Ðe alφabet is retarded to begin wið, but for ðe love of God, if you can say shit ðe same way wið less characters, why shouldn't you?
why are we so φobic when it komes to making writing and kommunikation more eφicient? Ðere is literally no reason to use 'c' over 'k'. Ðe alφabet is retarded to begin wið, but for ðe love of God, if you kan say shit ðe same way wið less karakters, why shouldn't you?
wy are we so φobic wen it komes to making writing and kommunikation more eφicient? Ðere is literally no reason to use 'wh' over 'w'. Ðe alφabet is retarded to begin wið, but for ðe love of God, if you kan say shit ðe same way wið less karakters, wy shouldn't you?
wy are we so φobic wen it koms to making writing and kommunikation more eφicient? Ðere is literally no reason to use '-es' over 's'. Ðe alφabet is retarded to begin wið, but for ðe love of God, if you kan say shit ðe same way wið less karakters, wy shouldn't you?
wy ar we so φobic wen it koms to making writing and kommunikaʃon mor eφicient? Ðer is literally no reason to use '-re' over 'r'. Ðe alφabet is retarded to begin wið, but for ðe love of God, if you kan say shit ðe same way wið less karakters, wy ʃouldn't you?
wy ar we so φobic wen it koms to makᛝ writᛝ and kommunikaʃon mor eφicient? Ðer is literally no reason to use '-ing' over 'ᛝ'. Ðe alφabet is retarded to begin wið, but for ðe love of God, if you kan say shit ðe same way wið less karakters, wy ʃouldn't you?

1 has the most sovl

if reducing characters is your aim you might as well make a chinese like system were each word has its own character

>if reducing characters is your aim you might as well adopt a system with thousands of unique characters
smartest austrian

reducing characters in texts not reducing the overall amount of characters, as adding new characters to replace many old ones that did the same job always creates more total characters

dhough

3 because im not autistic

Z or C.
Za ze zi zo zu
Ce ci

3 because that's how we dealt with Greek in the past.
Too bad that we just replaced all PHs and THs for Fs and Ts. At the very least the 'useless' digraphs helped show the origin of the words as Greek.

1 for Anglo-Saxon tradition. I did it for a while but it's too hard to change muscle memory.

2

⟨þ⟩ for both, of course

This. It's literally older than ⟨þ, ð⟩ in English chronology.

1 because I am autistic

Very true my brilliant American friend. Let us all adopt binary.

I'm saying in general, not just for English. Some languages have minimal pairs between the two

I agree wiŧ đis

>I'm saying in general, not just for English.
I describe; I don't prescribe.