On 2/27/06, Howard Brazee <howard at brazee.net> wrote: > Too bad, I saved that link to read after work. That meat of it was in Scott's first post. The thread starts off by someone asking if [some author I've never heard of] is going to be in "the list," then a couple more comments about "the list," and finally a publisher's representative posted the list of the books in "the list," of which Scott quoted the interesting bits or the entirety (can't remember which). > Now that "first US publication" has a new definition or definitions (it > isn't published all at one time), the rules should be revisited. I > vote for clarifying the rules to be "first printed publication". I've no objections. I don't think Webscriptions pre-releases count as "publication" anyway. E.g. the publisher explicitly reserves the right to fix typos in early releases; that's why only the HTML version is available at first. > I just noticed the other day, a grandchild picked up a Mercer Mayer book > for me to read. I had a companion computer version of that book that > has not been able to run on the last 3-4 computers I have bought. The > book still works just fine, thank-you. As do plain-text computer formats. You don't "run" them, you read them. That's why it's nice that Baen offers them in so many formats, including HTML and RTF (easily convertible to PDF). I'm not exactly advocating e-books (different strokes, etc.) but the good ones don't have anything in common with what you're describing. Max -- Be pretty if you are, Be witty if you can, But be cheerful if it kills you.