No Jim, you're misunderstanding.
I'm taking the forums and discussions as evidence alone. I say that the onus on Adobe to prove that they are taking these things seriously, not on me to prove that they aren't. It's plainly evident that they are not since that is the discussion we are having and the thread we are having it in.
In this thread, we are talking about a feature request that has been active for near (probably over) a decade. You only need to google this issue to find many other places where this particular feature request has been discussed and has been absent since discussions started in... on my google search page, the earliest discussion of this feature is 2007. That's just the first page.
I don't feel a need to search any longer.
You are correct that we would need to _know_ those tallies in order to make a judgment as to how Adobe is doing, but we cannot know this. We can only hope that those tallies exist and someone is paying attention to them. If that were the case, then it would make sense that older queries would be addressed with somewhat greater urgency than 10 years... Especially when it's a simple port of a function from AE to Prem.
It is not my job to babysit Adobe to take care of long-standing omissions, bugs and feature requests. But when I come on Adobe's own forums week after week and month after month and see ancient discussions like this one that are still untouched even with the very latest version of CC, I am left with only one logical conclusion.
So are you, but you're not reaching the same conclusion, so I can only assume that there's a problem with your logic.
The evidence is plain. The problem exists and has existed for over a decade. It has been discussed many times. It has been brought to Adobe's attention many times. Yet it has been ignored.
I am also aware that many companies have a policy (this is particularly bad for MS products) where problems are only addressed based on how many people have mentioned them, rather than evaluating the problems themselves. This is a course of foolishness.
Anyone with half a brain can understand that the more complex an issue is, the less likely people are to find this problem and the less likely you will have a large volume of people reporting it. Doesn't make it a less serious problem, it just means it's more complex, and it gets less attention. Still, I do expect that competent management would be able to deal with this disparity effectively.
The only evidence I have is the evidence that I can see. And from that evidence, I see problems like this one all over the forums for issues that have remained unsolved for years and are replied to by Adobe saying "this problem is known and will not be addressed".
I have a hard time believing that you spend serious time on this forum and you haven't come across this. Most of the things I have come to this forum to look for have a similar situation. This is because I come to these forums when I have a problem.
If you have a different experience, then I would suggest that it's very likely that you come to these forums for different reasons, so you are not spending time looking at problems that currently exist in the software. That also means that you are likely using different software for different purposes. No, you're not going to come across problems with Adobe actions if all you ever do is do brightness and contrast adjustments on family photos. No, you're not going to come across problems with Premiere fumbling around with nested sequences and track mattes if all you ever do is put a title on a couple of GoPro clips from the family.