cspell

content/elsewhere/simple-secure-file-transmission/index.md

@@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ encrypt the certificate, I'd run:
 The script creates an encrypted file, `production.pem.enc`, and outputs
 instructions for decrypting it, but with the password blanked out.
 
-### Step 2: Send the encryped file
+### Step 2: Send the encrypted file
 
 From here, I'd move the encrypted file to my Dropbox public folder and
 send Chris the generated link, as well as the output of `encrypt.sh`,

content/elsewhere/social-media-api-gotchas/index.md

@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ awesome. It's fantastic to see them embracing
 [REST](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representational_State_Transfer)
 and the open web. That said, the documentation doesn't paint an accurate
 picture of the Graph API's progress, and there are aspects that aren't
-ready for prime time. Specifically, the "Like" functionalty:
+ready for prime time. Specifically, the "Like" functionality:
 
 -   For a page (like
     [http://www.facebook.com/puma](https://www.facebook.com/puma)), you

content/elsewhere/unfuddle-user-feedback/index.md

@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ system we use internally, [Unfuddle](http://unfuddle.com/), already has
 all the features we need.
 
 Fortunately, Unfuddle has a full-featured
-[API](http://unfuddle.com/docs/api), so programatically creating tickets
+[API](http://unfuddle.com/docs/api), so programmatically creating tickets
 is simply a matter of adding
 [HTTParty](http://railstips.org/2008/7/29/it-s-an-httparty-and-everyone-is-invited)
 to our `Feedback` model:

content/elsewhere/using-microcosm-presenters-to-manage-complex-features/index.md

@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ particularly gnarly feature.
 In addition to adding text, photos, and buttons to their emails, users
 can add *code blocks* which let them manually enter HTML to be inserted
 into the email. The feature in question was to add server-side code
-santization, to make sure user-submitted HTML isn't invalid or
+sanitization, to make sure user-submitted HTML isn't invalid or
 potentially malicious. The logic is roughly defined as follows:
 
 -   User modifies the HTML & hits "preview";

content/elsewhere/viget-devs-storm-chicago/index.md

@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ canonical_url: https://www.viget.com/articles/viget-devs-storm-chicago/
 
 {{<dither 53100874_f605bd5f42_m.jpg "" "inline" />}}
 
-This past weekend, Ben and I travelled to Chicago to speak at [Windy
+This past weekend, Ben and I traveled to Chicago to speak at [Windy
 City Rails](http://windycityrails.org/). It was a great conference;
 highlights included [Dean Wampler](http://www.deanwampler.com/)'s
 discussion of functional programming in Ruby, [Noel

content/elsewhere/why-i-still-like-ruby-and-a-few-things-i-dont-like/index.md

@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ subclass? Do it. Want to open up a third-party library and inject a
 custom header? You get my point.
 
 As I've said, Ruby makes it easy to write nice-looking code, but it
-takes restraint (and mistakes) to write maintanable code. I suppose the
+takes restraint (and mistakes) to write maintainable code. I suppose the
 same could be said about the programming discipline in general, but I
 can see the appeal of simpler languages like Go.