...yes we agree.

> It would even be actively unuseful. Because this is a cage on wheels

You can go argue with eitland if you want, but their intent was a phrase that could signal "a car, a truck, a trailer with a power generator, etc."

As in a phrase that's vague but correct. I'd rather know something vague than know nothing.

I agree that being misleading is bad. But the LAMP comment wasn't misleading.

By the way, do you ever care if programs are web apps? If no, that's crazy, it matters a lot to how you can use it. If yes, then what is the difference between the situations you care and someone explaining phabricator?

If someone explained what you do with phabricator, but left it ambiguous whether you run it on your desktop or on a webserver, wouldn't you feel like that explanation was missing something?

-

Let's say someone had a list of facts about Phabricator to provide context:

1. It's software.

2. It's a web app. This also implies 1.

3. It's used for code and task management.

4. It uses linux, apache, mysql, php. This also implies 2.

When I go in knowing nothing, most of these facts are useful.

It's possible to guess from the article that it's software, but saying fact 1 is still good in making that clear.

Saying 1+2 gives even more info and makes it easier to understand the situation.

Saying 3 is also useful to understanding.

Saying 1+2+3 combines to give a great picture.

Once you've said all those, adding 4 doesn't help much.

But if someone didn't already know the previous facts, saying 4 also implies 1+2. Which is way better than nothing.