i said:
>   you might be surprised at some of the solidly-documented
>   error-reports which whitewashers have completely ignored.

now some whitewasher will feel the need to come here and say,
"we don't ignore your error-reports; but we do have a backlog".

they might also add: "and half of the error-reports we receive
are faulty, in that the so-called error is not, in fact, an error."

let me grant you both of those points.

(even though i have some suspicions about the second one.)

my point is that the mere submission of an error-report
does _not_ mean the "errors" will be fixed immediately...

...or at all...

jim can tell you more about this, if you want to ask him...

-bowerbird

p.s.  although maybe i should have let a whitewasher appear.
wouldn't it be nice, every once in a while, to hear from one?