diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
index 5d94c61..1d4c7ad 100644
--- a/README.md
+++ b/README.md
@@ -34,6 +34,19 @@
 that matter to you without making backup negatives.** I promise you're
 going to mess some of them up.
 
+Be aware that the discussion of still development techniques launches
+all kinds of religious debates. This is particularly true on the
+internet, where everyone is an expert.  I got interested in this
+because some very fine photographers make good use of it.  On the other
+hand, some very fine photographers think it is nonsense.
+
+There are also people out there claiming this is THE best way to develop
+everything.  These people, in particular, are just ... wrong.  Still
+development *may* have a place in your workflow if you have the
+patience to learn how do it repeatably *and* have subjects that would
+benefit from this *and* you are using formats and film that will work
+this way.
+
 
 ## Why Bother?
 
@@ -209,11 +222,10 @@
 occasional short agitation during stand development reduces the
 likelihood you'll see these gremlins appear in your negatives.
 
-Much to my surprise, as I tested, I discovered that even the single
-midpoint agitation of a semistand development can significantly
-increase apparent contrast and - in the case of Pyrocat-HD - level of
-stain (as well as Film Base Plus Fog). So each of these techniques
-has a place.
+Surprisingly, I discovered that even the single midpoint agitation of
+a semistand development can increase apparent contrast and - in the
+case of Pyrocat-HD - level of stain (as well as Film Base Plus
+Fog). So each of these techniques has a place.
 
 
 ## How Did I Test?
@@ -236,7 +248,7 @@
   time/temperature corrections as usual in your own work.
 
 * Pyrocat-HD is a developer mixed from two stock solutions. Dilution
-  is expressed as `Part A : PartB : Water`.  For Normal development,
+  is expressed as `Part A : Part B : Water`.  For Normal development,
   dilution was `1:1:100`.  For the various stand tests, dilution
   was either `1.5:1:150` or `1.5:1:200`.
 
@@ -334,7 +346,7 @@
 
 * Both Stand and Semistand need a full 2 minutes of initial agitation
   and it needs to be "vigorous".  Again, I suspect - but cannot prove -
-  that really kicking the development off hard at the beginning, reduces
+  that really kicking the development off hard at the beginning reduces
   the likelihood of bromide drag later.
 
 * EMA was fine with only 90 seconds of more normal initial agitation.
@@ -344,11 +356,10 @@
   drag.
 
 * The single agitation introduced by Semistand development seems to
-  noticeably increase overall contrast and density as compared to a
-  no-agitation Stand period.  It's not night and day, but given that
-  doing this reduces the risk of bromide drag, it's probably the
-  preferred long stand technique and this extra contrast has to be
-  considered.
+  increase overall contrast and density as compared to a no-agitation
+  Stand period.  It's not night and day, but given that doing this
+  reduces the risk of bromide drag, it's probably the preferred long
+  stand technique and this extra contrast has to be considered.
 
 * Given a normal dilution of `1:1:100` and an EMA dilution of `1:1.5:150`,
   I found that a good first order guess for EMA development time was