This is not a critique of your comment, but I am curious about our ambivalence regarding the following line of thoughts: - It seems to me that we are promoting

This is not a critique of your comment, but I am curious about our ambivalence regarding the following line of thoughts: - It seems to me that we are promoting in IT a lot the idea of taking decisions based on data i.e data-driven companies. - What does it mean to make decisions based on data? It seems to me that it looks exactly like this: we should look at what we want to change, look at the data and decide if the change will hurt/help/support a number of users. Do some math and then the result will be Yes/No for the decision. - Now, of course, we could add "look at the data, but also think about second-order effects, about hidden relations ..." but that looks to me more like a No true Scotsman argument where only companies taking decisions that we like are really doing data-driven. If we want data-driven decisions then why does it feel that the decision to impact only 1% of the users is wrong? (please note: I am not saying this Gitlab decision is a good one. Probably it affects more than 1% of the users. I am mostly discussing the idea of the OP about "impacts 1% of our users")