NationStates Jolt Archive

I've been thinking about how I react to people's bad spelling. If they misspell something, I shrug it off. I find it pointless and tactless to point out a minor typo or misspell, especially if I got the point they were trying to make.
However, if they persist in a particular spelling error, or spell horribly, I'll make sure to point them in the right direction.

Now this is all hypothetical. This means that if you were participating in the debate or was to reply right at the moment, what would you do. I, for one, barely ever get a chance to make spelling corrections because: A) I infrequently post, and B) Someone's already made the correction long ago. However, I would hypothetically do Option 2, so I go with Option 2.

So how often would YOU correct someone else's spelling?

(for saving space, I simply said spelling, but grammar applies just as much)

EDIT:

Reviewing my poll, it seems that it is a bit inconsistent. Options 2 and 3 should be switched, so that it is in decreasing "correcting" order. Oh well, you'll have to do with this.

Its a stupid tactic used to avoid the actual message inside the post.

I don't bother correcting people's spelling/grammatical errors, but I do think it detracts from their argument.

I only point it out if it annoys me or if there are too many. I have a pretty strong threshold for bad spelling.

A long time ago (probably sometime in 2003) it was ruled here that pointing out spelling mistakes is flamebaiting (though that doesn't seem to be enforced anymore). Elsewhere, I occasionally point out annoying ("turrent" for "turret", "calvary" for "cavalry", et cetera) or repeated spelling errors. It has nothing to do with hiding from the post's actual content...I don't recall ever pointing out a spelling error if I wasn't replying anyway.

Edit: I don't post much these days, so I guess any answer would be for elsewhere, anyway...

We had this already... (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=473989)