[Eugeleo]

I won't comment on your attitude, to not stir up your emotions even more. I'll just pick a little paragraph from your comment:

> The entire value I got out of this course in undergrad was technical writing. Learning how to actually "write" a proof, and not just nonsensically sling notation at a poor soul. Comparing Jeff's writing with mine, seeing where I tripped up, and trying again.

Specifically:

> Comparing Jeff's writing with mine, seeing where I tripped up, and trying again.

Hey, you get it! You spent an entire screen trying to pretend that having model solutions is wrong and useless and pointless, but you made a slip up and admitted you've known the value all along! Oopsie.

But yeah, I understand your point (kind of), but you yourself seem to find value in comparing your solutions with the 'correct' ones — not only the contents, but the formulation as well. Do you find it so hard that others, maybe some that aren't from Illinois at all and just like the book, would do the same?

[aspaceman]

My entire point is he’s written all the model solutions you need. They’re in the notes. That’s what I compared with. I didn’t have additional resources I’m talking about here. Just comparing my proofs with the ones given in the notes above.

You can’t possibly write all the other ones. It’s not humanly possible. Try it. You’ll get a Turing award if you do.