200 downloads and no feedback is discouraging. Whether or not a plugin meets all expectations, users should certainly take a minute to share feedback with open source authors.
I did research this before I found and tried your plugin. I was not expecting it could be done with a plain 3.0 installation (no buddypress, no related parallel installations). But I knew I could be wrong.
I would have to set up a test blog and then deactivate _that_, but to be honest, I currently still just copy and paste excerpts by hand, so I uninstalled the plugin.
Instead, please, let me ask you this: is your plugin designed to work under a brand-new 3.0 installation configured for multisite, 2+ blogs on a single database, and NO other plugins or support apps?
All I did for 3.0 MS is follow the how-to's which resulted in the table naming we already discussed. I'm not delighted with it (strange permalinks) but it works flawlessly. And, Google and my readers are using published permalinks.
It could take a lot of work to reconfigure a 10-blog site for a new table name (table prefix + ms_posts). This would probably change all the permalinks. As a "drop table" situation with a powerful text editor, this brings a lot of high-risk change with possible downtime.
So, it would be better if the plugin can work with the standard table names we have now.
Can you tell us why there would be two different naming conventions and where the _ms_ naming scheme originally came from?
Thanks -- Alex