From: willreich_77@yahoo.com   
      
   On Thursday, December 4, 2014 10:48:46 AM UTC-5, Michelle Bottorff wrote:   
   > Brian M. Scott  wrote:   
   >   
   > > > (Rebecca Friedman --she's been helping us with editing and   
   > > > is easily worth the not very much she charges-- says that   
   > > > it's a pity that most readers probably won't bother to   
   > > > look at a glossary, because mine really do add to the   
   > > > book,  but I figure that they're my little "easter egg"   
   > > > for those readers fortunate enough to have stumbled over   
   > > > them.) :)   
   > >   
   > > As you can probably guess, I *always* look at glossaries.   
   > > Often before I even start the book!   
   >   
   > You know, I think you're right. I probably could have guessed that.  :)   
      
   I don't know him as well as most of you guys do and _I_ would have bet on it.   
      
   > Bit of trivia just for you.  (Because who else would find it   
   > interesting?)   
   >   
   > At one point I wanted Borgim nouns to have a numbered and an unnumbered   
   > form, rather than a singular/plural.  (Sort of like lots of hair and   
   > three hairs.)   
      
   Hey, I found that interesting.   
      
   > But I had betareaders complain that it was too confusing.  :(   
   >   
   It could be. The test for me would be whether it was interesting enough to put   
   up with the confusion.   
      
   --   
   Will in New Haven   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)