On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 10:04 AM, Jim Adcock <jimad@msn.com> wrote:

Don>If PG is to have a hope of citizen-provided proofing, crowd or

otherwise, there are two non-negotiable design requirements.

I would hope that no one on this forum is in a position to issue
non-negotiable demands. Rather I would hope we could have a polite
conversation of ideas on the basis of their merits.

Read the post. If PG is to have a hope of citizen-provided proofing ...

then ..... It isn't so because I or anyone else declares it so.

You sound like you are admirably well equipped to correct your

own texts with only text search. I have no way to know, but I'm

willing to take your word for it.

I apologize if I misunderstood that we were having a conversation

at least partially about the topic of widely available techniques

for the public to submit corrections to PG texts. At least as vigorously

as how you proof your texts and on what terms PG accepts them;

which is clearly an important topic for you.