I kinda like it. I don't do letter revivalism myself, but when I ſee ſomebody typiŋ like þis (for instance), then the text becomes awkward to read, and I hear the words in my head as somebody with a speech impediment. But I don't think that's a bad thing, because many of the people who do stuff like archaic letter revivalism probably do have speech impediments! Or they might have difficulties with intonation or otherwise speak in ways that the people around them find "grating", so they're used to people saying that they sound really annoying when they talk. Which is to say that I see letter revivalism as a very autistic-coded practice, that whole sort of conlang / etymology / pop historical linguistics subculture it's rooted in leans pretty neurodivergent on the whole, ask me how I know. And so I can respect these letter revivalists for doing a small thing in writing that I personally find a bit annoying, because that small bit of annoyance makes me think about what sorts of voices people don't listen to because they're judged as annoying, right? I'veknownpeoplewithpressuredspespeechandandandandststutters, p'eople who actually ejectivize p'losives at the st'arts of words, pẽõplẽ wĩth ãll sõrts õf dĩffẽrẽnt qũĩrks ĩn thẽĩr spẽẽch, but when people write in this sort of broadly unmarked, standard style as I'm doing now, then what sort of voice do you read that as in your head? Do you hear those voices? Voices that read as obviously neurodivergent, voices that probably got teased in school? Or do you just hear a generic voice that reads as neurotypical? It can be good for neurodivergent people to be able to put on a neurotypical voice through writing, but it can also be good to make writing itself read as neurodivergent; and marked, proscribed, "going against the grain" practices like letter revivalism are exactly how to achieve that effect. Whether the people who engage in the practice consciously realize it or not, "I AM BEING LOUDLY AUTISTIC" is the effect they're creating by continually rejecting social norms around writing, even when people loudly complain or they get constantly bullied for it.

Otherwise, letter revivalism also signals belonging to an in-group of people who know about that particular topic. This can be sort of a double-edged sword, since while this sort of signal can help people connect with people with similar interests, it can also make the writer look like a bit of a know-it-all who has to say "look at what I know" to satisfy their ego. But I think it's best to assume the best from people in these sorts of cases. We can handle people being a little annoying. "All objects in the world come into existence, but the sage does not judge them; they are born, but the sage does not possess them; the sage acts, but relies on nothing; he accomplishes and moves on, and by moving on, he never has to leave."

You should watch SPARKLE ON RAVEN: The Life of DrillGirl; it is a very good show. {Cēterum|Furthermore} {cēnseō|I think} {iūs auctōris|copyright} {esse dēlendum|must be destroyed}.