Ok, i'm arguing that trading conceptually more complex multiple inheritance for conceptually simple JOINs isn't a win because multiple inheritance won't protect

Ok, i'm arguing that trading conceptually more complex multiple inheritance for conceptually simple JOINs isn't a win because multiple inheritance won't protect you from stuff blowing up. You"re just against multiple inheritance because it's a conceptual mess (I agree) without allowing for the argument that it might work better in practice (which I have anticipated and dismissed). Monopoly is concpetually more complex and less cleanly defined than Go, but not easier to play. I am saying that multiple inheritance is not Monopoly, but Go with extra, badly written rules. This is a pretty minor disagreement. You ignore a possibility, I mention it in passing and dismiss it. (Perhaps you're hung up on my stating that JOINs can be complex — conceptually complex is not the same as complex, just as universal algebra might breezily describe a realm of mathematics that has devoured the attention of geniuses for centuries.)