Is someone, let alone “cowering behind the veil of Anoymous Monk,” trying intentionally to provoke me?   ... Over something that, reality-check here, could easily be as inconsequential as memcached?   If so, then let this be proof-positive of why I don’t give a damm about “reputation points” or “XP.”   Both of them are utterly useless to me, and this is exactly why.   Something is “being taken personally” here, that is nothing but ones-and-zeros technical. There is a problem here, and I am merely doing the courtesy of calling proper attention to it.

Here is what I have, so far, observed:

1. When I visit the URL, just its home-page, there is large-but-not-100% chance that the information presented on this page will be stale.
2. I am reasonably 100%-certain that this is not a client-side issue ... I know where to look for caches, and have studiously eliminated them.   I see this behavior on multiple computers and from multiple IPs.
3. I do not see it every time.   I have visited about 4 times today, and twice it was current, twice it was stale.   Right now ... oops! ... I started to say, “it is current,” but on latest-refresh, in a single uninterrupted browser-session, it is now stale.
4. No other page on the site exhibits this behavior.   (However, of course, no other page is “the home page,” and is therefore less-likely to be cached.)

I have never before had the experience of, when timely calling the attention of the owners of a web-site to an apparent (and recently-surfaced ...) technical problem on their web-site, been personally castigated nor made fun of ... by anyone.   I have been using this web-site (software) for nigh on six years, so, if I say that I am (recently) observing stale-page behavior on it, may I therefore most cordially request that the bug-report be taken at face value?

and, if not ...