Summary of Revisions (following the Referee's points)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.  We clarify in section 2 (page 4) that the difference between the observed SDSS MF and the LCDM model prediction  corresponds to a shift of about 20% in cluster mass, which is a  ~1-sigma shift in the mass calibration.  This was not worded clearly before. No systematic effects in either the observations or the model simulations are expected or known. We  expect that  the future SDSS mass calibration will be impoved (through a more comprehensive comparison with weak-lensing, velocity dispersions, and simulations) and thus enable to test this possibility. As stated, the other likely possibility (more likely, we think) is that the comparison  suggests a slightly lower omega_m =~ 0.2 (and sigma_8 ~ 0.9, as suggested by other data).

2.  We clarify in section 2 (page 4) that the observed abundance at z > 0.5 suggests sigma_8 =~ 0.9 (+- 0.1). While this is slightly larger than the 0.84 +- 0.04 used for the current model,  the two values are consistent within the error-bars.  In fact,  the CMB (WMAP) data alone, without combining it with other LSS data,  yields  0.9 (as suggested by the clusters)!   A more exact value of sigma_8 obviously still awaits additional high precision observations.

3.  We clarify our discussion of the  Ro - d relation in section 3.  We note that the N most massive clusters at any given d are NOT ALL the same at all redshifts (due to mergers and other effects). Therefore, the scale-invariance explanation is not as simple.  However, many of the clusters are the same. The rest apparently participate in the same filamentary hirarchial structures and tend to yield the resulting near scale-invariance of the Ro - d relation.

4.  The strong  cluster CF,  which was indeed the origin of the 'bias' concept, was also the first to show that the then standard SCDM models with omega_m = 1 did not fit the data;  the observations yielded too much power on large scales  (even with the bias) that extended to much larger scales than possible by  omega_m = 1  models (cf. Bahcall & Cen 1992, and others). This is still one of the important evidence against a critical-density universe.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
