don said:
The alternative scenarios I can think of are:
1. The site has been hacked. But how could that be, if it's still up?
2. Marcel, or someone else, has misrepresented their authority to speak on behalf of the Corporation. (And why is the attribution to the webmsster and principle developer, without mentioning who that is? Except to reinforce that this is published on PG's authority, and not Marcel's authority.)
3. The PG site url has been hijacked, or actually belongs to some US affiliate of PG that doesn't represent PGLAF.
3. PG is not who I thought they were.
well, first of all, your numbering skills are off-kilter again. but more importantly, don't get your knickers in a twist... this is just marcello being marcello, overstepping his bounds, believing that _he_ is project gutenberg, just because he can post something -- whether authorized or not -- to the website. i'm guessing that greg never "approved" this, or even had the slightest idea that he'd have to tell marcello "you can't do that". like your 4-year-old making crayon drawings on the den walls. so as soon as greg gets drift of it, the "review" will be removed. and even if greg _did_ approve it, all we have to do is say "wha?", and he'll come to his senses. this is clearly not what p.g. does... but geez, don't get all hysterical... it's not that big of a deal. indeed, even if the "review" stays up, it ain't the end of the world. that's not what the mayans meant. -bowerbird