Currently I am in the process of converting your system (with a focus on LoM - which is still a significant amount of data) into a relational dataset for my game so a lot of this falls out through that process (I also happen to be a decent proofreader so I may be noticing details that others don't). My recommendation is to start updating the pdf's but keep a log of the last update date per document. I will keep adding to my main threads. If you check them by date periodically you will know what's new. And when you're comfortable you have enough then issue an updated version. Honestly, I have held off posting everything I noticed, focusing on the most significant items as I was worried you would find the questions/info annoying. I will go all in. That said, I would give it a few weeks. I certainly won't get to everything but I do have the luxury of deciding what to focus on so I will make this aspect a priority. If necessary, you can PM on the reddit account, I sent you a PM with my username there.
I just finished the Ant Queen. Note that in LoM you indicate her size is 'Huge' but if I am not mistaken in most references, such as the tables in the Monster Compendium you don't have a 'Huge' category. You go from 'Large' to 'Colossal'. For example:
Monster Harvest Size Table
Size Number of Parts Harvested
Tiny 0.5
Small 1
Medium 1
Large 2
Colossal 4
Personally, and maybe this was your intent, I think you should have Huge between Large and Colossal. There is room there I believe. Paizo, for example, has Huge and Gargantuan in between Large and Colossal. It seems off to me that if an Ogre's category is Large that there is nothing in between an Ogre and all other bigger creatures. Of course, just my two cents. I will plan to add at least Huge to my game (assuming it proves to be a good fit as I work through other monsters). Intuitively, I think it should.