Neutral party here: not the case, on your end, the mind-reading distracts from hearing the voice of Chesterton talking about his fence.
c.f. sibling comment written 10 minutes before yours, several trivial things.
More concretely from a downvoter:
1. I want _nothing_ to do with user data. Nothing. Toxic nuclear waste. The idea of keeping the waste on hand needs strong justification.
2. The idea of "just leave the rows but mark is_deleted" has a fundamental distate to a profession where O(n) is a constant worry.
3. The breezy way it dismisses this as an obvious solution that ~eveyone agrees suggets a small breadth of experience. That's not bad! But then we're at Chesterton's fence.
In summary, you can get downvoted for ruling out someone else's concrete lived experience, not just because your dangerous ideas threaten their paycheck (I don't even have a job!)
c.f. sibling comment written 10 minutes before yours, several trivial things.
More concretely from a downvoter: 1. I want _nothing_ to do with user data. Nothing. Toxic nuclear waste. The idea of keeping the waste on hand needs strong justification.
2. The idea of "just leave the rows but mark is_deleted" has a fundamental distate to a profession where O(n) is a constant worry.
3. The breezy way it dismisses this as an obvious solution that ~eveyone agrees suggets a small breadth of experience. That's not bad! But then we're at Chesterton's fence.
In summary, you can get downvoted for ruling out someone else's concrete lived experience, not just because your dangerous ideas threaten their paycheck (I don't even have a job!)