From: ldo@nz.invalid

On Tue, 23 Dec 2025 13:41:53 -0800, John Ames wrote:

> On Tue, 23 Dec 2025 20:38:19 -0000 (UTC)
> Lawrence D’Oliveiro  wrote:
>
>>> For myself, I am entirely comfortable saying that overwrought,
>>> kludgy, and (especially) abusive patterns are *objectively bad web
>>> design,* in the same way that the people in charge of Grenfell
>>> Tower were engaging in objectively bad architectural renovations
>>> ...
>>
>> Boy, what a way to escalate a strawman, conflating a matter of mere
>> aesthetics and personal annoyance with a situation that was
>> actually life-threatening on a massive scale.
>
> *A.* that's not what a straw-man argument is ...
> ... Obviously, having trouble with a misbehaving website is a
> smaller thing than burning to death in a badly-renovated apartment
> building.

You say no, and then you say yes.

> Arguing that web design is purely a matter of taste and objections to
> specific practices are Just, Like, Your Opinion, Man is, essentially,
> arguing that the design and implementation of systems for use by the
> general public is something where there are no real standards and no
> consequences to shoddy workmanship.

See, conflating opinions on aesthetics with issues of “workmanship”
(quality of product) is another strawman.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
 * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)