I think the point is that, if I'm looking for information about 'occurances of numbers', I will find nodes with the misspelling and participate in them. Whereas, if I look for 'occurrances of numbers' I will find nodes with the correct spelling and participate in them instead.
Nice theory, but it has nothing to do with reality. You are completely ignoring the way participation happens around here. And the way search is used. People don't use search to find threads to participate in. They use newest nodes and the front page for that. Sometimes people post a node under an old thread but that doesn't usually rekindle the thread. And if it did, it would probably be because someone saw the reply in the newest nodes list. Sometimes old threads get a little life when they are linked to in a favorably accepted meditation but that participation wouldn't be affected by your theory either.
A simple Search for 'occurrance' would find all the nodes about occurrances of numbers, and a Super Search for 'occurance' would still find those with the misspelling preserved in the body.
First, that's predicated on the assumption that the word appears (and appears misspelled) in the body. It doesn't always. It also assumes that people looking are going to use Super Search. Monks familiar with the site will, but new visitors very well may not. Thirdly, this ignores the converse anyway. If the word doesn't occur in the title, but only in the body, then search isn't "bring[ing] those two groups together" at all.
By the way, if the janitors corrected all the mispellings and you were looking for nodes about "occurrances of numbers", you would be the one having a harder time of it. You got the doubled 'r' right, but the word is spelled "occurrences" with an 'e'.
"My two cents aren't worth a dime.";