You're missing the point. The point is that even the most mundane decisions can lead to irrevocable negative situations, so one should think about worst case scenarios with every decision, as engineers are regularly trained to. Classifying things as type 1 or type 2 decisions can create a blind spot, as it did in this situation in my humble opinion. In reality anything can become a one-way-door decision.
The "dunk" is a side effect. Amazon's decision making on this issue does a really good job of illustrating situations where you make a seemingly harmless decision that you feel you could revoke at any time, but things take a turn for the worse and regardless of your ability to revoke the decision, you can't revoke the damage it caused, the preventing of which is the whole purpose of having this system of type 1 vs type 2 in the first place. AKA the type 1 type 2 system is imperfect and can lead to miscalculations, like this. A more useful framework might be "can I prove, convincingly, that there is a 0% chance this decision will lead to irrevocable significant negative consequences, if so then it is type 2, otherwise type 1"
The "dunk" is a side effect. Amazon's decision making on this issue does a really good job of illustrating situations where you make a seemingly harmless decision that you feel you could revoke at any time, but things take a turn for the worse and regardless of your ability to revoke the decision, you can't revoke the damage it caused, the preventing of which is the whole purpose of having this system of type 1 vs type 2 in the first place. AKA the type 1 type 2 system is imperfect and can lead to miscalculations, like this. A more useful framework might be "can I prove, convincingly, that there is a 0% chance this decision will lead to irrevocable significant negative consequences, if so then it is type 2, otherwise type 1"