You know, oddly enough, I was just browsing the site FAQ ( Page Not Found ), and marveling to myself that it was the best idea I've had in a long time.  It's cut down on the questions immeasurably!  And there you go, Alan, and shatter my little bubble.  From the FAQ:  Q:  Why are the Module Indexes arranged alphabetically by title?  Wouldn't it make more sense to have them arranged by module code?  A:  Originally, that's the way they were organized.  Unfortunately, there are several modules that do not have a module code (i.e., Lost Tamoachan).  Do we put them at the end?  Alphabetically, such as Lost Tamoachan after module L3?  Or what?  Regardless of what we decided to do, there'd be plenty of people who would be unable to find the module in the index.  If you know the module code, but not the title of the module, try finding another module in that series.  For example, if you're looking for module X7, start looking through the indexes for any of the "X" modules.  All the "X" modules are on the same page.  We thought about providing both indexes (alpha by title and alpha by module code), but decided this would simply confuse more people than it would help.  The only other solution is to use a dynamic indexing system, where you could sort the indexes by whatever column you wished, but this is a bit beyond our HTML capabilities at the present.    Foul

FoulFoot wrote:You know, oddly enough, I was just browsing the site FAQ ( Page Not Found ), and marveling to myself that it was the best idea I've had in a long time.  It's cut down on the questions immeasurably!  And there you go, Alan, and shatter my little bubble.

 LOL.  Well, my work here is now done....  Actually, I have read the FAQ, just not in the past two+ years or so, I'm sure....  Thanks for the refresher