Jim, in the business world, your complaint about the fact the business wasn't working on your preferred projects would annoy the hell out of your coworkers the eighth time they heard it, just like here.
That is probably a true statement: When one talks about things being "broken" and open for possible improvement the response is almost always universally scorn and derision. Only when an organization falls into acute duress is it usually open to considering change -- if then. The US auto industry being perhaps a current, but weak, example. Stating that I have a dim view of P3ers is probably overstating the case. What I am sure I have a dim view of is: Query-hyphen and especially the rote overuse of it by some P3ers. The rote removal of whitespace on both sides of m-dash even when that is clearly not author intent. Some P3ers who are clearly just SR'ing without looking at the page images. Punting "bugs" down field under the assumption that *someone else* is going to fix them. Not having a clear point in the process when the "proofing" phase is supposedly done. Taking 3+ years to create a text, or not finishing a text that has had considerable volunteer time and effort invested in it. Designing a process where *no one* is allowed to take responsibility for a text. Distributing texts that have less than 1 or more than 1 copy of some portion of an author's text. Distributing "risen to the public domain" texts under DRM Preventing friends and fellow citizens from sharing texts "risen to the public domain" Otherwise claiming or enforcing restrictions on the sharing and redistribution of texts "risen to the public domain" Creating texts that cannot be used as widely as possible on a great variety of differing reader machines including addressing issues of "accessibility" Demoware -- Sorry if any of these statements are controversial -- I don't think they should be!