The "Long S" usually foxes the more inexperienced transcriber - Rufsell for Russell etc - but is understandable, as are, indeed, many transcription errors.
My biggest bugbear is that unwillingness of major sites to admitted transcriptions were wrong in the first place and keep the entries indexed under the original transcriptions, even when they are clearly wrong. The sites' users have gone to much trouble to bother sending in corrections and can provide "chapter and verse" as to why corrections are necessary.
They might suggest there is an alternative - but why not get rid of the totally misleading version?
Some of the sites are also unwilling to accept the version provided by the transcriber. I volunteered to transcribe for one site and was given "modern" registers of marriage - those where the brides' and grooms' surnames appear not only in the box completed by the registrar, but also as their own signatures. I looked at both (and also the registrars' entry of the fathers' names) and my transcriptions were "bounced" if I chose their own signatures (often very clear signatures) over the scrawl of the registrar which could be interpreted differently.
