How’s that for a boring title?
As a continuation of my experiment with publishing original scholarship on this site, I have just uploaded an eight-page PDF containing two conjectures on the text of Seneca’s Agamemnon, titled as above (link). (I thought of calling it ‘Ino the Answer’, but that only applies to the first half.) Feedback on the substance or expression of any of these notes, listed in the right-hand column, may be left as blog comments. Your first will be moderated, but once you’ve had one approved, others will be approved automatically, unless you behave so badly that I am forced to blacklist you. I don’t expect that to happen often. My reasons for and against publishing ‘Microscholarship’ in this way will be published soon – on this site, of course. So far I’ve thought of 8 pros and 3 cons.
Here’s a question: should I format all the papers for HTML as well as PDF? Those with numerous footnotes take a lot of time to convert: is it worth it, from the reader’s point of view? So far, that’s the two that contain emendations, this and Curculio 2, on Cymbeline, but that may be coincidental. Textual criticism often lends itself to succinctness.