Forum Moderators: open
In one case, it flagged a few long sentences which contained a series of misspelled keywords (widgets, wigets, wigdets, etc), maybe 15 to 30 commas in each sentence, several sentences total. The text appeared in a small but legible font in the deep footer of the page, where a normal user seemed extremely unlikely to scroll to.
In another case, it flagged sets of adjectives referring to widgets, such as 10-20 colors the widgets were available in, with several sentences following that pattern.
These techniques seemed to ensure that those pages ranked well for misspelled searches and for narrowed searches (I've seen countless web designers do this city names), but if the tool flagged them, does that mean the pages will eventually get penalized by search engines? And while I doubt search engines understands that excessive text or misspelled keywords are buried in the page's footer, would a human review by an SE employee lead to a penalty?
In this case, I suspect the tool spotted the keyword stuffing, which is pre 1998 spam, and of pretty limited benefit to anyone. The misspelling may not have come into it at all.
You certainly cannot assume for a second that such techniques are ensuring anything. How could you possibly know what google likes / dislikes about that site.
And you'd be a tad unwise to use spam techniques - even 1998 ones - on that basis.
