***This is my "in for an inch, in for a foot" response for which I will
probably get slammed.

BUT:
Mitch Turitz (for whom I have much respect) said:
-------
If we start basing publishers for not keeping up with their own stated
frequencies, then what's next?  Complaining that they have not put the
ISSN on their publications? Or telling them that the ISSN is not enough
and they must have included the SICI (extended ISSN which includes
vol/issue information), OCLC number, and LCCN as well?
Should we complain loudly that a publisher has changed their volume
numbering without sufficient reason and demand that they change it back?
It's their publications and it's their decisions on how to publish them.
-------

***And I say:
What's next is expecting the makers of laundry detergents to put the
correct instructions on the box, not changing the formula so that now
this only cleans in hot water, but leaving the old cold water directions
in place.  Expecting that the next time I want to bake a cake, if the
cake mix box states it has 16 oz. in it, and I need to add 1/4 c. oil
and 2 eggs, that is correct, that they have not changed the contents to
12 oz. and the necessity for just 3 T. of oil along with an egg and a
yolk.  In neither case am I going to be happy to learn that the TV
commercials or the website had information about the change and why in
the world wasn't I paying attention?  Isn't it my business to do so
before I commence with my housework?

***Yes, I'm mixing apples and oranges, along with my metaphors, but why
in the world are we not to complain when *anyone* does not live up to
what they say they are doing?

***As always, YMMV.

Truly without malice, but perhaps just a bit of indignation,
particularly on an afternoon I've spent the past couple of hours of,
researching claims . . .

Jeanette Skwor
Cofrin Library
UW-Green Bay