Is equanimity more sublime that an excellent act? What might be more or real "cool"? 

For example (in practice), seeing a spelling error or a typo:


Would the one "not touched", ignoring the error (even he would have the possibility, skill and means) be regarded as higher?
Or the one taking on a correction (even if not having best possibilities, skills and handicapped ways, nevertheless by skillful means)?


In summary, is equanimity more sublime that an excellent/skillful and beneficial act? 

Side question: if beneficial help is more sublime, to what extend would a seemingly beneficial help be actually unskillful, lower than equanimity?



[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma, not meant for commercial purpose or other kinds of low wordily gains by means of trade and exchange]
'Equanimity' is the last of the four brahmavihara (metta, karuna, mudita &amp; upekkha) &amp; is practised together with the other brahmavihara. For example, if there is good-will (metta) &amp; the wish to help (karuna) but no possibility to help then equanimity (upekkha) is practised. 

Therefore, in Buddhism, there is no such thing as practising equanimity as an alternative to performing a beneficial act. Equanimity is only practised when a beneficial action cannot be performed due to another person not capable or not willing to change or benefit. 

For example, AN 4.100 says speaking praise &amp;/or blame in the right situation is more advanced &amp; exalted than equanimity. However, as said, the situation must be the right appropriate situation. For example, preaching &amp; proselytizing dhamma when not asked &amp; to people who don't want to listen is not a "right situation" to perform unwanted "beneficial acts". AN 9.5 says Dhamma, as a gift of benevolence, is only taught to those who wish for it and who listen attentively.