So we could send them a MR to fix the footnotes (cause mentioned in sibling response). If it has not been fixed already. Not me anymore, well past midnight an a long trip in front of me tomorrow.
Yes. It's sad because this is an otherwise well-written and important article that needs to be widely distributed and taken seriously. But people will be put off by the formatting errors.
It looks like 8 out of 17 footnotes didn't become footnotes properly. Every second footnote is displayed in the middle of the text, with a name tag like [^regappid] instead of getting a number.
