I think the analogy would be, say a restaurant hires a busboy to clean. But he starts cleaning tables when people are still eating. This is an improper use of "cleaning." So the restaurant says, "we don't like the way people are cleaning, so lets get rid of all of the cleaning supplies." Problem solved?
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I think the more appropriate analogy is the restaurant wants to clean off the tables by letting anyone take anything off any table. People put a lot of work into cooking a dish and someone throws it out before it is eaten. Why bother putting effort into cooking in a restaurant like that?
Posted using Partiko Android
Doesn't matter what the analogy is because you said:
Which, to me, means no cleaning because people might clean wrong.
Fine, let's use your analogy where everyone feel entitled to "clean" everyone else's table, which I agree is a terrible situation. So the restaurant says, "we don't like the way people are cleaning, so lets get rid of all of the cleaning supplies." Problem solved?
I don't think changing the analogy makes your solution of eliminating the functionality at all suddenly work.
Perhaps there is more than one way to clean a table.
Posted using Partiko Android
Warning. Contradiction detected: "I don't like the functionality at all; perhaps there's more than one way to do the thing we should't do at all."
Now you are just arguing in bad faith. There may be more than one way to control abuse. But if you are just trying to "win" the discussion then I concede. Congratulations on your victory!
Posted using Partiko Android