Minor copy edits/spelling fixes (#33)

training/autoflagging.md

@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ the nearest 0.01%.
 
 ## How can you sign up?
 Make sure you have a metasmoke account. You can sign up for a metasmoke account
-[here][ms-su] if you don't; make sure you authenticate using Stack Exchange so that we can
+[here][ms-su] if you don't already have an account. Authenticate using Stack Exchange so that we can
 associate your SE account with your MS account.
 
 Visit the [authentication page][ms-auth] on metasmoke. If you're happy with the disclaimer,

training/charcoal.md

@@ -2,16 +2,16 @@
 ---
 
 # 1. What's Charcoal?
-Charcoal is a user-run volunteer organisation that aims to help keep Stack Exchange sites
+Charcoal is a user-run, volunteer organisation that aims to help keep Stack Exchange sites
 free of spam.
 
-To do that, we have a [team of people][people], and a bot, [SmokeDetector][sd].
+To do that, we have a [team of people][people], and a bot named [SmokeDetector][sd].
 SmokeDetector detects spam and reports it to our chatroom, [Charcoal HQ][hq]; the people
 present in that room review the reports and take whatever actions are necessary on them.
 
 We keep track of the spam we've caught in our web dashboard, [metasmoke][ms], to enable us
 to analyse our results and improve our detection techniques. We don't aim for zero false
-positives, but for zero false negatives - ideally, we'd like to never miss a spam post.
+positives, but for zero false negatives. Ideally, we'd like to never miss a spam post.
 
 ## Who's Who?
 We try to keep hierarchy to a minimum, but of course there has to be a minimal amount. We

training/index.md

@@ -12,10 +12,10 @@ understand or if you still have questions. Don't worry if you're still not 100%
 everything - you'll pick it up as you go.
 
 ## Participation
-Just so we're clear on this one - there are no minimum participation requirements for
+Just so we're clear on this - there are no minimum participation requirements for
 Charcoal. I know being linked to an intimidating series of documents with serious titles
 like TRAINING kinda brings that feeling with it, but rest easy. You're equally awesome if
-you handle 1 spam post a month as if you handle 1000 - this training series is just making
+you handle 1 spam post a month or if you handle 1000. This training series is just making
 sure we're all doing it consistently.
 
 ## Training Index

training/privileges.md

@@ -4,20 +4,20 @@
 # 3. Privileges
 SmokeDetector has a limited number of commands that are available for anyone to use. However,
 all its major functionality requires additional "privileges" to use. Being a privileged user
-entails your user ID being added to a list in SmokeDetector's code, which entitles you to
+means your user ID has been added to a list in SmokeDetector's code, which entitles you to
 use privileged functionality.
 
 ## What do they let you do?
-Like I said - they let you use privileged functionality. That includes running privileged
-commands, a list of which is available [in the wiki][commands], and feeding back on reports.
-More detail on feedback to come in the next training section. While you can follow along
-with reports from SmokeDetector and flag spam without privileges, if you want to interact
-with SmokeDetector or the wider system, you'll need to be given privileges.
+They let you use privileged functionality. That includes running privileged
+commands. We have a full list available [in the wiki][commands]. You can also provide feedback 
+on SmokeDetector reports. More detail on [feedback][4] is provided in the next section. You can 
+follow along with reports from SmokeDetector and flag spam without privileges, but if you want to 
+interact with SmokeDetector or the wider system, you'll need to be given privileges.
 
 ## How do you get them?
 Privileges are called that for a reason - they're a privilege, not something everyone gets.
 We're pretty free with who we give them out to, but there is a short list of guidelines
-to help your case. Those are detailed in full [in the wiki][wiki], the TL;DR of which is that
+to help your case. Those are detailed in full [in the wiki][wiki]. The TL;DR version is that
 we want to make sure you're sane and have at least some experience of Stack Exchange and
 community moderation. We expect everyone with privileges to be able to get along and act
 like an adult.

training/reports.md

@@ -6,8 +6,8 @@ When a report comes into Charcoal HQ, there are two major things we need to do w
 and feed back.
 
 ## Flagging
-This you should be familiar with. Follow the link to look at the post, decide if it needs
-flagging, and flag it with the appropriate flag if so.
+This you should be familiar with, since you have experience on Stack Exchange. Follow the link to look 
+at the post, decide if it needs flagging, and flag it with the appropriate flag if so.
 
 ## Feedback
 The point of feedback is to record whether the post was correctly detected or not. Feedback
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ The canonical covers-all guide to feedback is [in the wiki][wiki].
 ## Self-promotion
 While persistent, undisclosed self-promotion is classed as spam, it's a less clear-cut issue
 than regular advertising spam. Some sites are more lenient on the issue than others. You
-should exercise judgement while dealing with self-promotion.
+should exercise judgment while dealing with self-promotion.
 
  - Take a look at the user's profile. If this is their first post, they almost certainly
    just aren't aware of the policy about disclosure. You can let it go without flagging.

training/spam.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 ---
 
 # 2. What's spam?
-Stack Exchange uses a specific definition of spam that's different to the definition used
+Stack Exchange uses a specific definition of spam that's different from the definition used
 by many other sites. It's most concisely detailed in the flag dialog:
 
 > Exists only to promote a product or service, does not disclose the author's affiliation.
@@ -21,8 +21,9 @@ That means this is spam:
 > exactly the function of Malegenix today?  
 > Visit here \<spammy link\>
 
-(That's a [real post][post], by the way.) This is also spam, if the blog belongs to the
-post's author:
+(That's a [real post][post], by the way.) 
+
+This is also spam, if the blog belongs to the post's author:
 
 > Visit this awesome blog (link) to find the answer!
 
@@ -31,16 +32,17 @@ However, this is not:
 > To fix your problem, you should foo your bar and pass your baz to quux.  
 > I wrote about this in more detail on my blog (link).
 
-That post discloses the fact that the blog is the author's, so it's okay. This isn't spam
-either:
+That post discloses the fact that the blog is the author's, so it's okay. 
+
+This isn't spam either:
 
 > delete me delete me delete me delete me delete me
 
-If you come across something along those lines, it's most likely self-vandalism - where a
+If you come across something along those lines, it's most likely self-vandalism, which is where a
 post's author has removed a post's content in an effort to delete it. That's not something
 Stack Exchange allows, but it's not spam.
 
-As always, use your best judgement, and ask if you're not sure.
+As always, use your best judgment, and ask if you're not sure.
 
 -----