Oh I did read the article, and I understand that this is aimed to encourage dual-use, rather than excluding one or the other. I was merely expressing myself in

Oh I did read the article, and I understand that this is aimed to encourage dual-use, rather than excluding one or the other. I was merely expressing myself in favour of continuing to use it, even though their omission is not an error anymore. If they really wanted to simplify things they'd be better served looking into rules about the place of the COD and 'avoir'... I have traumatic memories from primary school french lessons ;) (Also, while I agree with it's spirit, I resent the hostility about your misunderstanding of my post)