Eh, you’re trying to put words in my mouth.

I didn’t ascribe a motive to anyone. Their reasons are their own and it only makes sense that the people who stay in these fights do it because it’s part of their jobs.

There are people who, for whatever reason, keep debates going over small points of disagreement and prevent issues from being settled. Sometimes for years. Right?

The older I get, the more likely I am to recognize and route around or ignore interminable debates. Especially if it’s not for a company, project, or initiative under my direct control.

Remember, the question at the top of this thread was essentially “What happened to ‘masonry’?” Well, there were quibbles over the descriptors.

I don’t care about quibbles. “masonry”, “grid-lanes”, “grid-masonry”, pick one, they’re equivalent. I don’t like it when quibbles block progress.

Sometimes people and companies do want to block things. You’d have to ask them why. Like I said earlier:

> I don't have an incentive to build consensus within a group of people who fundamentally disagree that the thing I need should exist.

Pick your battles… Actually, no, it’s usually better to ignore the fights and just get what you need to get done so you can move on.