BG> Half of your purported bugs were either one-offs, or not bugs at all, so 
BG> I'm not at all surprised that they ignored you.  I would have too.

PE> They were all bugs. 

BG> Nope, at least one definitely wasn't (i.e. the S56 register), nor were you 
BG> If an anomaly occurs only ONCE, and cannot be reproduced, or if the CFG 
BG> file supplied with the SDL resets S56 to 0, I WILL ignore them.  Happily.

Even that one, I am talking about that AT&F command doing that.  Are
you talking about the CFG file that goes AT&FS??=??&W.
If so, then it's still a bug.  But otherwise, yes, you can reduce the
bug count from 15 to 14.

BG> able to reproduce the majority of them.  As I said, they were one-offs.

Some of them, like the failing to connect with EC, were only once-off
because I didn't dial out often enough.  It's only inbound calls where
I get a large number of samples.

PE> just be honest about it, and admit that USR (and you) don't take bug
PE> reports seriously.  I expected that.  Undoubtedly all of my Spirit
PE> bugs were once-off and not bugs too.

BG> Not if they occurred more than once.  Which they did.

And David Begley's connects occurred more than once.  So did the
Hayes.  So did Rod's.  So did the ATZ.  USR could have answered 
AT LEAST those ones.  BFN.  Paul.
@EOT:

---