They say doctors make the worst patients. Can the same be said about us? When we read stories, we generally tend to read them as writers. Yet, most of the people that would wind up reading our own work would not be writers, meaning they would not be reading it the same way a writer would. For instance, I have never in my life heard a reader with no writing experience (outside of school, of course) say, "I had to stop reading because there were too many adverbs." I've never heard a reader complain about dialogue tags or the use of synonyms of "said." It doesn't seem like readers without experience as writers really seem to care about these technical, dare I say nit-picky details that many writers seem to either love or loathe. I've shown some of my work to unbiased readers (aka NOT family/friends); work using a lot of semicolons, adverbs, adjectives, and a bit more telling than I would normally like (even one piece with the entire first paragraph full of alliteration), and none of them mentioned any of it. All of the feedback I got was on the content of the story itself. On the contrary, one piece had shifting POV (a convention that seems to be acceptable among writers) and was told never to use it. Ever. Apparently it prevents connection between reader and character. The point is, readers who aren't writers don't seem to care about many of the things we scrutinize; they just want a good story to read. So, my question. Obviously writers are different readers. But do we spend too much time looking for things that, in essence, go ignored by general readers? Or do these things really matter, and readers just don't realize it? Do writers make better or worse readers?