errr why does it have to be? at the end of the day, the only person who needs details on bugs is Toni, and he doesnt have to publish all the details on site. if there HAS been a full bug report (which you are clearly too stubborn to do youself, in spite of your willingness to call all of Toni's work pointless) then he will have details. but unless you do it yourself, you can have no guarentees he has the details, and that's your own fault.
I beg to differ. It's normal practice that if a program is released with known bugs, or bugs are found after release, that bugs are listed eg. at the website; this is simply a courtesy to the users, and serves several purposes, eg. enabling users to work around the problem and therefore not having to encounter the bug, avoiding duplicate bug reports, etc. Eg. this is how it is done on SourceForge. (For emulators, it is also usual to list known incompatibilities, not necessarily for specific games etc. but a general "subsystems that aren't emulated" lists, etc.) No purpose is served by keeping bugs secret, the "security by obscurity" principle doesn't apply unless it is an exploitable vulnerability.
I'm willing to do a formal bug report in case this wasn't done by the other people who have experienced this bug. I'm not sure what format he'd like it in though, I assume he wants it done in a formal way? As I've already reported it informally in this thread and clearly that is not considered a bug report, so I shall do a formal one.
I did just notice that a new version was just released today (1.4.2a), so I will ensure it still happens before submitting such a report. From the changelog it does look like it may have been fixed, that would be great.