i have been told that jim has posted a message saying that he asked me to give him my "bug list" of errors in his "huck". perhaps he did ask for that. however, i do not read jim's posts any more, and nobody restated his request (at least that i saw), nor did anyone tell me back-channel when he made his request. *** at any rate, i don't have such a "bug list". moreover, it would be as simple for jim to generate that list as it would be for me to do it for him, so i will let him do it... *** what benefit do i get from making it simple for him to make _his_ version of "huck" as error-free as _my_ version is now? none, that i can see. it would just make my version superfluous at p.g., if i were to decide that i should submit it. so i see no motivation for me... *** jim thinks he can abuse me, and then ask me for a favor. ha! my version is online, free for the taking. jim can do it himself.

http://zenmagiclove.com/huckf/huckf-007.zml

*** or, if any of _you_ wants to, _you_ could do the work for jim! download my text, and his text, and do the comparison, and test the diffs against his scan-set, and give him the "bug list". sounds like he would appreciate your help... (or maybe not.) *** i did inform jim that there were 22 paragraphing differences between his text and mine, and that roughly 75% were errors in _his_ version. he shoulda been able to find those easily... but he never reported back. so why should i do a follow-up? *** i also informed jim that he missed lots and lots of italics, and that is another set of errors he should be able to easily locate. but again, far as i've heard, he made no efforts in that regard. again, if he doesn't care, why should i? *** but, to repeat, just so the message gets through _clearly_, i do not have such a "bug list". never even generated one. i resolved my diffs, and didn't look back. didn't care about jim then. don't care about jim now. and i'm quite happy to know he don't care about me either. *** perhaps this means you believe i cannot correctly estimate the number of errors in jim's version. i can see your logic. so, what about you and i bet on my estimate vs. your logic? first, you can choose anyone reasonable as referee, who will hold the money from each of us, and rule on errors. (referee will, of course, promise to be totally impartial.) if there are _exactly_ 100 errors, it's a total _push_... if there are more than 100 errors, you owe me $200. or, if there are less than 100 errors, i owe you $200. plus you owe me $2 extra for every error _over_ 100, and i owe you $2 extra for every error _under_ 100... loser pays the referee 20% of the total pot as a gratuity... who wants to take the bet? step right up and take the bet! (if that's too rich for you, you can cut the amounts in half.) *** if jim does something worthwhile, i'll hear about it, and react. (heck, if you want to inform me, assuming you are not _also_ in my kill-filter, then i would be happy to receive your report; i want jim to receive every little bit of credit that he deserves.) but until then, jim, don't bother whining. won't do you any good. -bowerbird