Roger, I accept your statement that you were not setting out to prove bad intention on behalf of the editorial team, and I apologise for implying that that you did.

However, my warning/alert still stands: constant repetition of that same evidence again and again can appear as willful and of doubtful intent.

As we are on an apologising/retracting tack, would you now care to apologise for claiming that I accused you of slander (when all I said was that repetition CAN APPEAR to be willful and malicious)?