[dvtv75]

> Heck, they can understand eevn wehn yuo wrte lkie tihs.

Not aywlas. I keep sineeg tihs, and ftnrqleeuy fnid mlesyf nidneeg to dcgrusaioe (or at lesat cllhgeane) the ptsooiin. For slaml wdros it can wrok, but I fnid tihs is iltnrheeny dcfuliift (and dnniirag, as wlel as fttrrnsaiug!) to raed, and dns'eot slace to let you raed in a ceorneht fhisoan oevr a ranblaosee poierd wtih mtlui-sllibyac wrods.

Iiagnme a cueopmtr sncciee or poolsghcyy txet dylpaeisd or ogzeriand tihs way. It wulod be ulllnntiigbee, or at the vrey bset a sptmbuioal mhoted of trrrnfnseiag lraeg qnttaiiues of dlteeiad itfrimaoonn atalccurey.

Butifyou'regoingtomessupwordsandclaimreadability,whynottakeoutspacesandseehowyoumightfare?

Orsrmcablewrdosinsteeenncswhoitutseacps,too?

Hope there aren't any spelling mistakes, I tried to ensure everything was correct before I messed with it. I spent way too long on this, and since I've tried to check everything out I need a break. It was still quite enjoyable to do, although I'm sure it had a negative impact on my spelling.

[romwell]

Descrambled:

> Not always. I keep seeing this, and frequently find myself needing to discourage (or at least challenge) the position. For small words it can work, but I find this is inherently difficult (and draining, as well as frustrating!) to read, and doesn't scale to let you read in a coherent fashion over a reasonable period with multi-syllabic words.

Imagine a computer science or psychology text displayed or organized this way. It would be unintelligible, or at the very best a suboptimal method of transferring large quantities of information accurately.

But if you're going to mess up words and claim readability, why not take out spaces and see how you might fare?

Or scramble words in sentences without spaces, too?

------------

Quite readable. Cant' vouch for spelling mistakes, or lack thereof :)

[dvtv75]

You've given me quite a chuckle - I'm glad someone took the time, given how long I put into it :)