>Why? > >What good would that do? > >Stan >St Petersburg Russia
The reason is to put pressure on Nikon to address the problem.
Thinking that a product producing company (with competition) does NOT have an invested interest or take seriously their customers dis-satisfactions is the height of naivety.
Even if they do not "publicly" address the issue, they are most certainly going to at least attempt to respond to their manufacturing process going forward. In today's world where the typical buyer often researches the more expensive products on the internet, having this issue can result in a huge loss of revenue.
The reason they don't want to publicly address the issue is because it will cost them money to do so (pay for routine cleaning, parts replacements, shipping). Good business management would weigh those costs with the revenue losses due to people not purchasing the product and reputation losses. When those are greater than the cleaning, parts replacement, and shipping costs etc., then they would be more likely to address the issue.
Basically the more well known the issue the more potential revenue is lost. Which is why people that are dissatisfied should post their feelings and sign petitions. This is how the free market works.