Mary Fisher wrote:

Who did I correct? And if I were an English teacher would you accept what I
said?

Umm, if we're going to be all pedantic - which it seems to me you were,
Mary - then the clear answer is 'no'; at minimum I'd want you to have
written 'Whom did I correct', not 'who did I correct'. (Since the answer
is 'I corrected him', not 'I corrected he', then the correct form is
'whom', not 'who'.)

Does it matter? Here on uk.d-i-y, barely at all. Here, the 'voice',
'register', or whatever word you prefer, is informal. So I don't see any
more of a problem with the odd typo than with 'could've' in place of
'could have', or a hundred other informalities I'd cringe to see in
something like a Government communique. (Seeing 'could of', mind you,
sets me off gnashing my teeth - though I wouldn't bother posting to
correct it in anything other than extreme circumstances ;-) As the
who/whom thing shows, spellcheckers do no more than alert you to
individual words not being in the dictionary; and blindly following
their dictates can produce the most ridiculous howlers, too. I shan't
bore you all with the anecdotes, but I will steal the following poemette
[see, there's a word a spellchecker would barf on, yet it's an obvious
enough playful usage] from
http://www.learningplaceonline.com/l...-silliness.htm

Ode to the Spell Checker!

Eye halve a spelling chequer
It came with my pea sea
It plainly marques four my revue
Miss steaks eye kin knot sea.

Eye strike a key and type a word
And weight four it two say
Weather eye am wrong oar write
It shows me strait a weigh.

As soon as a mist ache is maid
It nose bee fore two long
And eye can put the error rite
Its rare lea ever wrong.

Eye have run this poem threw it
I am shore your pleased two no
Its letter perfect awl the weigh
My chequer tolled me sew.

S'far as I'm concerned, other matters - interleaved snipped posting,
reasonably formed sentences, relevancy - matter more in this forum than
perfect spelling. Badly misspelt stuff is harder to follow, but in a few
cases (You Know Who You Are ;-) are all part of hte, I mean the,
individual style, and the raw punchiness of the contributor I'm thinking
of more than compensates. (And the wilder misspellings provide at least
as much entertainment as the average cryptic crossword clue: it's like
learning to decipher the ramblings of the heavily-accented old git in
the corner of the pub and discovering a welcome acerbic wit).

Stefek