Just to add: sometimes things do change. Even things that persisted for a long while.
I don't see the Canadian Mint as an enemy or so, just as a company that, as the higher vulnerability to milk spots proves, does a job bad.
If they would start to do the job better, it's fair to also say it, and take it into account when chosing.
In some past I had the idea that the problem cause had alot to do with the 9999 instead of 999. I don't know if this is true, it just seemed a plausible explanation, even in case other 9999 coins/rounds do not show this, because the latter sometimes have a much higher price and then more care (read: costs) in the production becomes an option, unlike the 'regular bullion' maple leaf.
My question here origined from this thought: that Mint personell / designer / decision makers are not stupid or so, and they must be aware of the milk spot subject, so if they decide to introduce a entire surface relief pattern, they might also have done something to get rid of that extra milk spot vulnerability. From this thought, I brought this up.
It's a "forget the past" (even if it's still the present), and a recheck the present case, the new design.
I think I'll give it a try. I'll have again some maples to look at, without needing to open that monsterbox (and next possible the disaster picture I prefer to not know in case). They're cleanable though, so that 'disaster' is not *that* explicit. Just alot work
