having this conversation _again_, for the 83rd time, is just lunacy. let's just cut to the f**king chase, ok? *** do we all agree that p.g. has to offer .epub versions? and .mobis? and the standard .html? and .txt as well? do we all agree that maintaining multiple versions of every book (.epub, .mobi, .html, .txt) is not practical, at least not if/when we expect whitewashers to do it? do we all agree that p.g. absolutely _needs_ to have a dependable tool that can do all of its conversions? do we all agree that marcello's tool is badly inferior, because it puts undue constraints on the input files but nonetheless makes massively crappy derivatives? do we all agree that p.g. cannot allow "snowflakes", idiosyncratic files that will break the conversion tool? do we all agree that if the individual contributor will bear the burden to keep files updated reasonably well, they can submit their own versions for all derivatives? do we all agree that if an individual contributor wants p.g. to bear the update responsibility, then _one_ file -- and _only_ the one -- will be used as the "master" which generates the derivative versions, and _tough_ if that individual contributor doesn't like the quality? do we all agree that every individual contributor then _must_ submit the p.g.-defined "master", in the event that the individual contributor is judged to be derelict fulfilling the duty of doing timely update maintenance, even if the contributor considers this "master" file to be a "dumbed-down" insult to their other _superior_ files? *** if we can all -- or maybe just _most_ of us -- _agree_ on that set-up, maybe (just maybe) the whitewashers will agree to loosen their grip on the reins of power... otherwise, if you expect _them_ to do all of the work, you can expect that they will continue to call the shots. -bowerbird