As with so many of the South African species, as far as taxonomy goes, looks are often the least of the matter. Many seggregations are based on minute morphometric considerations. In regards to horticulture, these are certainly different plants. D. cuneifolia is far lager and well grown examples often get that gold/green coloration found in so many S. African species. In taxonomy, the wheels of revision turn slowly, and prexisting published literature exerts a powerful inertia often difficult to overcome. There has always been a dichotomy between field studies and the more scholastic studies of the existing published literature and herbarium sheets, yet both studies are essential for taxonomic consideration and species determinations. Recent field and cytological studies sure open the door for seggregating the two, and I would support that. At the same time, I feel there are also good grounds for keeping the two taxa lumped together and am happy that this call falls on broader shoulders than mine. The ICBN is a scholastic entity spanning centuries, so a "let's just wait and see" stance isn't uncommon considering such revisions must be tracked and conserved in perpetuam, and it's a likely bet that no one is going to rush to the cupbord to open the can of worms that is the hallmark of South African Droseracae. Granting the extreme variation to be found in these taxa, a very narrow view in regards to their seggregation is all that has prevented an unintelligent proliferation of species novae. Splitting is out for the S. Af's and this should please and not distress those that grow them: we can't keep track of what species we DO have to grow!