Wow, good one dude. Ad hominems and belittling people disagreeing with you as irrational and (over)emotional are always classy tactics.
Uhm, what were you doing in the first place then? Did you not expect or want responses to your posts? You raised a question and argued for a stance in regards to that question. (Never mind that the question was already asked and answered earlier in the thread.) Yet I ... "turned this into a debate"? Again: please quit it with the derailing tactics. If you have actual counterarguments, I would love to hear them, but this ... no thanks.
No. I was pointing out that one has to accept compromises when designing a product; that at some point, one has to accept that something is good enough. Not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, and all that. It should be plenty clear from my posts that I did not mean one should always accept compromise, in every situation, and never question them, as your reading seems to think I meant (this is already a design with very few compromises overall!), but I have argued explicitly for how and why this specifically is a reasonable and potentially necessary compromise (and how not accepting that compromise could likely lead to other, more detrimental compromises). I mean, it's not even an intended feature of a case, but something added on because it was possible. And to remind you, that was directed at you actively arguing that no fan mount at all was somehow better than an imperfect one. Which either speaks to a staggering inability to see beyond your own wants and needs, or, as I instead chose to see it, a rather oddly chosen principle to adhere strictly to.
If this is how you respond to people presenting on-topic arguments against you ... please take a breath.
