Doug.
Sadly it seems you feel the need to keep digging in the hole you have created for yourself, but as long as you continue to make unwelcome comments which directly affect me and the work I and others have carried out on behalf of the site, there has to be a response.
The decision in question has nothing to do with what pilots may know about the registration authority of the country they live in.
The changes that have already and irrevocably been made also apply to the United Kingdom, where the CAA also enter the builders name in the manufacturers field as they are perfectly entitled to do.
Such authorities are rightly held in high regard for the work they do in the field of aviation safety in particular - and much else of course - but their records relating to the details we are discussing are not in a format required by the many aviation web sites and their members who have the prime interest of aircraft identification.
I am a lapsed member of two other well known aviation websites, who have very vocal memberships. The problems you predict have not arisen.
Again you perpetuate your direct insults to myself by implying, this time, that if I am not a pilot I am unlikely to "know about (my) their countries' aircraft registration requirements" Not acceptable my friend even to those of us far away across the Pond.
Like yourself, I believe, I frequent a local airfield, have many pilots as friends, am aware of the work that inspectors, some of whom are airfield pilots, who oversee and authorise the work of kit builders. I have also been subjected to a Mayday whilst flying in a light aircraft. I will not go further but oh so hope that you may accept that I have more experience to offer than the ownership of a few books and a camera.
This is not a question of whether the Airport-Data Admin team consider the FAA database or any other such database for that matter, to be inaccurate. We have chosen for good reason to apply a different type of listing, one that we believe to be more consistent, PARTICULARLY, I should point out, for those who have no reason to be aware of the FAA database in any detail. Remember, not every member, I feel sure, shares your obvious loyalty and detailed knowledge. Why should they? Our membership envelops all, from the guy uploading a yellowed copy of granddad's Cessna to very knowledgeable individuals such as yourself.
Doug, nobody, including myself, doubts your contribution to the site, and to individual members, both at its birth and on a continuing basis but having made your point and understood that we have now made the change, you will have to accept, along with all members that we have made a change in direction.
Ken Wang is well aware of all the work we carry out in the way of alterations to the database, particularly where the changes affect large numbers of common airframes. I can assure you that nothing of any consequence takes place without his knowledge and approval.
Finally, your "challenge" is nothing short of nonsensical. Ken and his team work hard on behalf of all members and we will continue so to do. There remains so much more that needs to be done and I fear that your unnecessary and continuing protests may have a detrimental affect on the morale of the team.
May we please move on!
Malcolm.