Nearly 3000 votes were cast, and 95% of respondents preferred footnotes, with the remaining 5% either indifferent or preferring endnotes. The results are hardly surprising to any reader, but they are surprising when one realizes how the major academic publishers have all shifted to endnotes. I gather the main explanation for this shift--since it has nothing to do with reader preferences--are primarily logistical and financial: type-setting costs, the ease of converting to an electronic format, and the like. But since I suspect the preferences of philosophy readers are little different from the preferences of other academic readers, there is a clear opportunity here for a publisher to lead the way. I for one would give preference to a publisher that maintained a commitment to footnotes. What do others think? What explains the demise of footnotes? Are there other considerations at work?