It's just that the official way of doing it it -as Mark also states- is master drive on the end, slave in the middle.

I looked for evidence that this was really the case, and specifically why this would be the case, and haven't found any. Does anyone have any evidence to back this up?

See, I don't think that "official way" really exists. Not in the way it's been stated in this thread. I think that what people are seeing is a second- or third-hand retelling of the concept of cable select, and this misinterpreted version is getting retold and spread like an urban myth. I think that if the two drives are deliberately jumpered for master/slave, then it doesn't matter what their order is, and it never did matter.

I'd be happy to change my tune on this, if someone can show evidence above and beyond "I heard it was supposed to be done that way." Of all the people on the BBS who I'd expect to have this evidence on hand, it'd be Mark (remember, he's the Linux IDE guy ).