	The proofing task itself is also kept as simple as possible. One page is proofed at a time, and the editable text from the OCR (or the previous round) is presented alongside the original scan. Users do not have to commit to anything more than that single page. The website also offers a tool called “WordCheck”, which makes the proofer’s job a little easier by checking the text against a dictionary of “good words” and “bad words” created for that particular project.
	There is one major pitfall that could prevent some users from contributing anything beyond smooth reading to the initiative, however. While the Distributed Proofreaders website itself is navigable and readable with a mobile browser, the proofreading task itself is designed for a desktop browser. Mobile users with a tablet may have some luck, but proofreading proves very unwieldy on a smartphone. However, this is probably an unfortunate result of the task’s requirements (including dealing with close detail, and reading across two frames), rather than a problem which can be improved. 
	Users are able to keep track of their own progress in terms of pages proofed and formatted at each proofing or formatting round, and are also given a place in charts where they are ranked based on the number of pages they have contributed. This gives the task a – very small – aspect of friendly competition, which could motivate both competitive users and those who simply enjoy seeing their own statistics climb.
Content providers, users who scan documents and prepare OCR text, project managers, and post-processors can receive extra recognition to their name by opting into receiving credit for their work. While some proofreaders and formatters might be frustrated that they do not receive credit, their omission is understandable — the alternative is a list of credits which could potentially number in the hundreds, effectively rendering individuals’ names invisible regardless.
	When not competing with each other, users can interact in the Distributed Proofreaders forums. Here they can discuss, among other things, Project Gutenberg, individual Distributed Proofreaders projects, and digitisation technology; there’s also a general social chat, and a dedicated discussion thread for each user team. Users can join up to three teams, which are often very social and centre on everything from nationality, to hobbies, to preferred tasks in the workflow. This social interaction helps to transform what can sometimes be a very tedious task into a community-driven activity. Additionally, project managers are encouraged to reach out to teams with special interests, which keeps users involved in tasks they find particularly engaging.
	While there’s fun to be had in friendly competition and the social side of the community, Distributed Proofreaders may be better at creating a sense of satisfaction. If users share the initiative’s goal of “preserving the literary history of the world in a freely available form for everyone to use”, or are interested in literature or cultural heritage in general, they can probably be satisfied with their contributions towards the production of free eBooks and the dissemination of literature. There is also satisfaction to be had with a job well done, with one’s progression through proofreading ranks and user charts, or even with simply carrying out the job, if the user does enjoy proofreading in itself.
