JC> SB> misspelled word, or missed comma, either.  I'm talking about lots of
  > SB> misspelled words.  No editor is going to bother wading through an
  > SB> unreadable manuscript.  No writer who is an absolutely atrocious
  > SB> speller or grammarian is ever going to get published.
JC> With computer programs with spell checkers that shouldn't be a problem.
  > Although I don't normally run e-mail through a spell checker, if I was
  > going to write a poem or an essay, I certainly would.
Actually, it is.  The spell checker wil assume the word is correct if it
is a legit word, even if it's not correctly spelled in the context in
which it exists.  One person who posts on poetry persists in major
misspellings, all of which would pass the spellchecker.  For example,
she makes her plurals by adding 's, instead of s.  She spells write,
right, and rite all the same way: r-i-t-e.  These days, I just correct
her spelling; and do nothing more.
By the way, I would never correct spelling or grammar on this
conference.  I would *only* do that on a writers' or poets' conference.
                           Sondra
-*-
 þ SLMR 2.1a þ When our center is strong, everything else is secondary.
--- Opus-CBCS 1.7x via O_QWKer 1.7 
---------------