Beautiful response. I was going to take a different direction, but yours makes better reading. Dan writes: HN tries to de-emphasize authors in titles. But HN

Beautiful response. I was going to take a different direction, but yours makes better reading. Dan writes: HN tries to de-emphasize authors in titles. But HN should also remember that the goal is to improve the discussion, not to just to follow the preexisting rules. In this particular case, I think adding "H.G. Wells" would have helped rather than hurt the discussion. If you think the same, you probably should have added it. If you think the final discussion is better without (perhaps you are right, the quality was good, and had the name been added maybe this would be the first in an onslaught of rerepublished letters by science fiction authors who've been dead for 100 years) then you should keep it off. But as the one making the rules, it's kind of cheating for you to point at them as explanation for your actions.