Interesting idea; I'd thought that such merging is quite rare. Still quite a conundrum why to pick the newer date for the human readable "age", and the older d

Interesting idea; I'd thought that such merging is quite rare. Still quite a conundrum why to pick the newer date for the human readable "age", and the older date for the timestamp. At this moment I see discrepancies on the front page, rounded and sorted (hours): - 63, 64, 62, 57, 56, - 30, 27, 22, 22, 12, - 9, 8, - 1, 0.5, 0.5, 0.4, 0.4, 0.4, 0.3, 0.2, 0.2, 0.1, 0.1, 0.1, 0.1, 0.04, 0.03, 0.01, 0.01, 0.01 So 12 out of 30 are strangely shifted by more than an hour.