Well, that is most certainly not what I said
What I said was:
a. a lot of what OP has observed, I have not observed, and the few things I have noted that were similar might be a result of semantic errors in the code for Survival (i.e., typos that do not cause runtime errors, but result in "wrong information" being displayed or used by the application).
b. posting about such bugs here in these boards and expecting (as OP and others have let on they expect) it lead to fixes by the developers it not the best way to go about things (if getting the supposed bugs fixed is the actual objective)
c. using denigrating language like "broken" and "not even beta quality" and "full of bugs" and "lazy" is almost never going to be helpful in any circumstance
d. there are naturally standards of documentation that any sane developer or QA team must insist on from bug reporters
If you actually found bugs and you are actually frustrated because those bugs are real (meaning you are not being a histrionic drama queen/troll) then you honestly have my empathy. But I cannot say I've had the same experience AT ALL. To me it is a suprisingly "bug free" game, though there are functionalities that are "rough around the edges" and limitations that are somewhat disappointing.
The response to these entirely valid points by me seems so far to have been to accuse me of ad hominem, to accuse me of "defending laziness" and/or to chock any such comments under a label of "broken community full of members who refuse to grab their pitchforks and storm the castle."
You do realize how ridiculous that sounds right?
If you really do have what you think are bugs, then do the proper procedure to report the damn things and move on. A thread here to see if others are experiencing it and/or commiserate is one thing, but a thread that is obviously intended to either troll or flamebait is just stupid, and the thread probably should've already been locked just based on the content of the OP . . .