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)