Chapter 4-02 


A Brief History of the Internet 

Web site by Gifcom.

A Re-Visitation to the Chandelier by Michael S. Hart

Every so often I get a note from a scholar with questions and
comments about the Project Gutenberg Edition of this or that.
Most of the time this appears to be either idle speculation--
since there is never any further feedback about passages this
or that edition does better in the eye of particular scholars
or the feedback is of the "holier than thou" variety in which
the scholar claims to have found errors in our edition, which
the scholar then refuses to enumerate.

As for the first, there can certainly be little interest in a
note that appears, even after follow-up queries, of that idle
brand of inquiry.

As to the second, we are always glad to receive a correction,
that is one of the great powers of etext, that corrections be
made easily and quickly when compared to paper editions, with
the corrections being made available to those who already had
the previous editions, at no extra charge.

However, when someone is an expert scholar in a field they do
have a certain responsibility to have their inquiries be some
reasonable variety, with a reasonable input, in order to have
a reasonable output.  To complain that there is a problem w/o
pointing out the problem has a rich and powerful vocabulary I
do not feel is appropriate for this occasion.  We have put an
entirely out-of-proportion cash reward on these errors at one
time or another and still have not received any indications a
scholar has actually ever found them, which would not be more
difficult than finding errors in any other etexts, especially
ones not claiming an beginning accuracy of only 99.9%.

However, if these corrections WERE forthcoming, then the 99.9
would soon approach 99.95, which is the reference error level
referred to several times in the Library of Congress Workshop
on Electronic Text Proceedings.

A Book by Michael Hart