1. Writing corrections should be OFF by default.

   
   Check: A process of examining or verifying something to ensure it is correct, consistent, or functioning as expected.
   
   The system says: Parity is valid. The system does a check if that assumption is still valid. A parity check stresses your hardware like no other operation. Cables, HBA/Sata controllers etc. If those somehow fail during the check, the "write corrections to parity" will ruin your parity. There should always be a check first. A second run should be used to write correction AFTER user intervention. This gives the user the ability to check the logs, see what happened and if there could be a hardware explanation. If so, fix that and do another check before you alter / ruin your parity. "You can always do another correcting parity check if the first one was because of hardware failure"; Yes, but you assume no HDD will die during that second process. If that happens, you can say bye bye to your data.
   

2. In all settings there is an explanation of what a certain settings does. On the Main Tab there is no explanation under "Check" or "Parity Valid", just that it will start a Parity-Check. It also does not explain what "write corrections to parity" precisely mean and what the possible dangers of this setting is. My suggestion would be to add more information here. And possible move the question to write corrections to parity to a pop up window that will specifically ask you (and explain) if you want to write corrections to parity. If it is the first parity check since / parity is valid it should suggest the user to just do a check, without writing corrections.

18 hours ago, FreakyUnraid said:

If those somehow fail during the check, the "write corrections to parity" will ruin your parity.

It should not, any hardware errors it will abort, not invalidate parity.

39 minutes ago, JorgeB said:

It should not, any hardware errors it will abort, not invalidate parity.

Okay, perhaps my understanding of writing corrections to parity is not 100% correct. This reinforces my argument for adding more information / context for the user.

But even so, I don't see a reason to immediately write corrections to parity without giving the user the ability to first check what was found by parity check.