You didn't mention them by name but I posited at #45 that you were only defensive of a particular approach because it's the one taken by the retailer you're involved with personally, rather than because you genuinely believe it is better. You were given the opportunity to deny that LNER have implemented a manual fix susceptible to the drawbacks I was explaining. You didn't do so, and now
@Wallsendmag has confirmed that this is the case.
Your argument was that every retailer other than LNER is doing less well for having not made such an intervention.
@Adam Williams and I have been politely pointing out that others are strongly likely to have principled reasons to reject the approach
@Wallsendmag confirms LNER are using. We are making the case that it's not due to an oversight or lack of ambition that others haven't used this approach. That's not a criticism of your professional approach but I think you'll agree it's unfair of you to imply that the solution you're both putting some effort into advocating ticks all of the boxes?