I definitely could have phrased my objections to what you wrote in a less provocative manner. My bad. So thank you for the level-headed response to my feedback.

I definitely could have phrased my objections to what you wrote in a less provocative manner. My bad. So thank you for the level-headed response to my feedback. > Of course, if designed for ambiguity, information machines can handle it. I thought you were implying they couldn't. I just had flashbacks to too many arguments with people who don't get how computers work where they claim that machines are just ones and zeroes, on or off, black or white, and humans are so many shades in between. What do the kids these days say? triggered I didn't get that you were referring to the process of capturing user requirements. I can see in that context why you would call that process 'squishy'. I wouldn't disagree with you on that, then it's probably a perfectly good work to describe that open-ended, frustrating! iterative process of discovery and refinement. I really asked for those down-votes with the tone and manner in which I first replied to you. :/ Let some bad news I received filter through there. sigh