`:::: That is certainly true. Normality assumption is popular, easy to understand and work with, and can be valid in a variety of situations (depending on the field you're working in). Who never used normality assumption shalt be the first to throw a stone. :::: However I'm trying to point out that having two results side-by-side — one being asymptotically valid for any distribution of the errors, the other being applicable only when errors are normal — is very much misleading. This distinction should be at least emphasized and made clear. Even better would be first to consider normal errors, and after that to provide the method for calculating the predicted response confidence interval in the case of arbitrary errors (probably bootstrap). ...  »  »   `