Even publishing houses and professional proof readers never get rid of typos completely. This has to do with "word blindness" and oculomotor mechanics. The eyes "saccade" across a line in a series of fixations, then make a return sweep for the next line. Each fixation has a different duration, probably depending on reading skill. It also takes in more or less print; this is the so-called "span of recognition".

The more familiar the reader is with the text, the wider the average span of recognition, as revealed by an eye movement camera. This means that the oculomotor system is getting instructions from the brain to "skip", and make fewer fixations. As the brain processes the incoming text, it acts like a 'predictive' text entry programme on a mobile. It makes guesses! And many of them are wrong, even though the brain perceives the text as fault-free. The text is in there already, and is merely being replayed, as far as the brain is concerned. So your grey matter is happy to skimp on recognition of detail, so long as it can confirm the flawless image that it already contains.

That's how reading works. Old newspapermen don't know any of this jargon; but they know from practical experience that the brain plays tricks on you.

So what's a boy to do, when he's finished draft H? Look for fresh eyes! Only a person who has never seen the text before will do. Force the text upon them, as many as you can find, and let them find the typos.

There is no shame in typos, and in a review I tend to ignore the obvious ones.

Malume, I like it. 'There's no shame in typos'. Maybe now that you've put some scientific jargon to it, Malume, that'll help the rest of us see typos for what they are.

Absolutely true. Nor in spelling errors nor in formatting nor anything stupid like that. But why, oh why, do some writers continue to take offence at having them pointed out? I think it harks back to our school days when our teachers called us over for a lecture about chewing gum and while they were at it, made us straighten our tie and pull up our socks for good measure.

I recently listened to an interview with the lifelong editor of Ted Hughes. Ted Hughes couldn't spell for peanuts. The editor's main job was fixing Ted's spelling and grammar, which was surprisingly atrocious. Hughes took pride in his individuality and never bothered to write any differently. Why follow the herd, eh? I doubt we aspiring writers can get away with that cavalier attitude, not in an age where everyone with a laptop is a writer.

I still think it's worth proof reading the best we possibly can before upload as a basic courtesy to our reviewers. If it takes half an hour to proof 10,000 words, say, but five reviewers each spend ten minutes picking up the same issues then that's a collective time inefficiency. Also, writers are less likely to get a useful review on their story if the reviewers are tripped up by the basics.

When others point mine out they save me money on inkjet cartridges. At 75 bucks per pair, any advice on typos saves both me and the environment. It would be cheaper to throw away the printer and buy a new one, because new printers are 60 bucks and they come with cartridges. (And if anyone Down Under knows a good place to get 'em cheaper, I'm open to suggestions. I'm sure the post office is a rip off.)

So, yes, now even typos are bad for the environment. Just like owning a second family car. Worse, even. It is environmentally unfriendly not to point out my typos.

Antcity, I think you're right about the typical trajectory of a new reviewer. I identify with what you say. I'm finding myself more and more fussy about what I'll read, too. I'm guessing the veterans on here may have swung that way?

And they'll say this has all been said before, two years ago, in fortnightly cycles.

At least I can say I wrote something today.

Surely it would depend on who we left in charge to change the presets, and to what.

We currently give that job to
1. parents (who don't need a licence to breed)
and
2. teachers (who get paid fek all yet are entrusted with our future)

Then there's Paris Hilton et al.

Oh I didn't realise it was one of them 'teacher already knows the answer' type questions!

But maybe you're right. That's very optimistic. Friday must be almost here.

Oh, that's right. It's still Thursday morn over there. Bummer.

A scrappage deal for tired metaphors...like it. Could we convince the publishers of a similar deal for tired plots?

I'm getting myself a T-shirt with 'There's no shame in typos' on it! Work as if you live in the early days of a better nation - Alasdair Gray