Now that the final rulebook is out, I must ask if there was any substantial differences between the complete game and what was reviewed here?
(I bought the game after reading the other rpg.net review*, and feel its scores are much more in line with my own opinion. A total score averaging less than 3 is decidedly pedestrian by rpg.net standards, and I must say the book is very nice indeed:
Nice layout, okay rules, and a spectacular background section. It really is a work of love (and impressive research), and the authors enthusiasm show clearly.
And besides the index issue I haven't really found any glaring mistakes - that is sufficiently rare to warrant a higher score all by itself, I would say.
In short: Far worse entries have gotten scores in the 4's, and this one I would say is not deserving of any less! All in my opinion of course
*) http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/13/13671.phtml