On 12 Jan 2000, Placid Ol' Dingo wrote:
> Arthur Sowers <arthures at magpage.com> wrote:
>> > 1. Life is too short for spell-checkers, and
> > 2. If you deal with people who spend more time worrying about _spelling_
> > than the _content_ in the message, then you are wasting your time.
>> Which has absolutely nothing to do with why prospective post-docs who
> exhibit bad (or 'non-standard' if you prefer) spelling or grammar *will*
> be at a disadvantage when job hunting in a competitive market.
I have never heard any information that people like Bill Gates, Donald
Trump, etc., got where they are today based on spelling abilities. I never
was good at spelling and never will be.
I have heard from many sources that: i) good work ethics, ii) being
drug-free, and iii) knowing how to think a little and knowing a few things
will contribute to not only a job offer but job security.
I don't remember anyone in the last eight years I've been on this NG
reporting after an interview that they were given, first thing, a spelling
test and were told, before going further, "You flunked our spelling test,
therefore you don't get the job."
I have heard a few remarks that a poorly written cover letter and
CV/resume, or one with lots of spelling and grammar mistakes will not get
any sympathy by a reader, so those are the places one should be doing the
proofreading and using the spell checkers (and maybe even getting another
person to proofread what you are producing).
Or.... did you mean something else when you wrote your sentence above?