[nbouscal]

There are enough independent correlates of success that any given successful person will almost certainly be missing one of them, if not several. Writing well is one example. That said, it does still correlate to success, and therefore still functions as evidence. There are too many comments on the internet to act as though every one is equally worth reading. It makes more sense to do a quick Bayesian update on the available evidence and move on to a comment that is more likely to be valuable. This isn't a value judgment about the person who made the comment, it's just pragmatism.

[jcc80]

Oh, I misinterpreted what you meant then. Regardless, your logic is sound and has lead me to think about things I hadn't considered. So, from now on I won't disregard grammar errors but will instead use them as evidence. That said, I'm kind of stuck on how to proceed when the ideas in a comment are trending towards valuable but I reach a grammar error. Maybe how to handle those is just a function of personal preference or available time? Also, based on your experience, should I consider user names as part of the available evidence?

[nbouscal]

They're weak evidence. If the first half of a comment is valuable it's probably worth reading the rest. And yes, username is strong evidence. I read every comment I see from patio11, for example.