Craig G's comments have me repenting of accusation.

Whatever you say about "professional responsibility" you have to ask "Where does this stop?".
e.g. if you got a leaky fuel selector on ebay and put it in your airplane and the inspector didn't detect it, is he culpable?
if the inspector didn't detect that there's a layer of peel ply somewhere in the spar is he culpable?
if you crash your cirrus vfr into imc is Cirrus culpable for not reprogramming your neurons to realize that is not a smart thing to do?

While Michael Smith's description of the current defintion of legal/professional responsibility seems representative, it is also the death of freedom in so many ways.
The only way experimental aviation can survive is with a different standard, which I think Craig captured pretty well.

My apologies for being on the wrong side of this issue.

Colyn