`EffectivelyPrivate` false positives?

A couple of scenarios:

### `public` methods on inner `private` classes

```java
class Outside {

private class Inside {
public void doSomething() {
// ...
}
}
}
```

I'm prepared to be told that it's worthwhile warning on `doSomething()`, but at the moment it seems a bit like noise. It appears to me it's not just 'effectively private', it is private because it's defined in a private inner class?

It will also warn on `public` (and `protected`) constructors of private inner classes.

### `public` methods on `private` inner classes that are extended by `public` inner classes

```java
class Outside {

private abstract class InsideParent {
public void doSomething() {
// ...
}
}

public OutsideChild extends InsideParent {
// ... other stuff
}
}
```

`doSomething()` is supposed to be visible and accessible on `OutsideChild`. This is a fairly common pattern, isn't it?