Anyone know what the rationale is for leaving the door closed? Why does Recteq so strongly recommend that?
The only thing I can think of is maybe someone at RT thinks not changing what they've recommended in the past somehow doesn't admit to a revealed hazard/liability. At my company (a large commercial airplane maker) the product liability lawyers said the exact opposite. It shows lack of willingness to correct a known hazard and it's more likely that someone pursuing punitive damages would be successful.