:)) I liked the other one better, too, but then I saw where it MIGHT not have been by the original author. I say "might" because at the bottom of the snopes piece it indicates that Reese has updated the article periodically and that his last update was in April 2011 -- so I might have been okay to have left well enough alone, but I was trying to be responsible. I would appreciate it if you took the time to restate your comments. Thank you.
I liked the other article better, too, but after I got wind that Reese had retired in 1995, I wasn't sure that the article was legitimately Reese's -- though after reading farther down on the Snopes page it does say that he periodically updates it and that the last update was in April 2011, so the newer version probably is legitimately his. Thank you for taking the time to answer my first version. I would still like the opportunity to consider your comments.