Are There Legitimate Reasons To Choose New Zealand Over Chinese?

[Mulsiphix1]

From the official rules:

These are essentially the New Zealand rules, re-worded to be as simple and elegant as possible. The NZ rules are in turn the simplest version of Chinese-style rules around. The NZ rules are worded with definitions given recursively, which is elegant and a joy to computer scientists, logicians and mathematicians, but perhaps not so nice for most others. John Tromp came up with the key idea of a stone “seeing” (or as I’ve presently worded “reaching”) a different color. This was the brilliant step which enabled such succinct rules. My modest contribution was the wording for the end-of-game criterion, and putting an expansion into a second tier of interpretations rather than rules. This was

1. to keep the logical rules as simple as possible, and
2. to keep things close to how the game is actually played by humans.

 
And a fun fact about OGS’s implementation of New Zealand rules:

New Zealand Rules Are Actually Closer To Tromp-Taylor

Note: I created this thread hoping a developer might be able to answer my questions. Thanks to users and good old fashioned research, all of my questions have been answered. I have now rewritten this first post to reflect the knowledge gained, since no questions need answering any longer.   I recently learned about NZ rules when I did research to outline the differences between New Zealand and Chinese Rules here on the forum. I was curious which parts of the Official NZ rules were faithfully i…