>You referred to those as "grammatical glitches" - they're not. At best, you're talking about the way to express something.
>
>On #1, I disagree. When I refer to "organizations", I'm talking about anything from government agencies to online database groups to non-profit organizations.
>
>On #2...I neither agree nor disagree....the reason for the emphasis is that OLAP in particular has a learning curve that some view as particularly daunting. I don't think there's an issue with or without it.
>
>I realize you referred to these as minor, but I don't think they register at all.
>
>When I get my edits back from my copy editor, believe me, there are plenty of red marks. CoDe's copy editor is a very good one - he's been working with Microsoft for years.
>
>I don't consider myself an outstanding technical writer - I'm decent and competent, but I'm no William Safire. I consider myself a developer and a storyteller. Emerson, Lake, and Palmer once said that they recorded music for the purpose of playing it live - I write for the purpose of presentation and demonstration.

You are more than a decent and competent writer. You are good at it. I didn't call you incompetent or anything like that. "Glitches" was not an accidental choice of words. If you were some hack I would not have commented at all.

My intention was not to slur your copy editor. I'm sure he is competent, just probably overworked or doing this on the side.