Perfection in scope

As a personal comment, I've learnt a very valuable lesson today: We take most of this world for granted. We judge by first impressions, third-party critiques, and an overall composition. As what we do here is right, it is also senseless. Such judgement speeds up the process of specific selection for what we believe is "best", so given the vast variation of choices, we weigh them, and take the best overall choice - beneficial to us. The cruel world of fittest survive applies everywhere - its 'nature' - somewhat.

I argue now, in the context of best-overalls are the best choices, that they are in fact not.

As for most people, they don't know what they want; greed is like fire to flies. But this security of "i have an overall, it can't possibly go bad anywhere" takes you one small step further while you lose all the other overlooked half flawed selections. What is lost here, is the choices which could've pushed much more the best-overall could are all gone, because as far as balance resides in the universe, newtons equilibrium, yinyang, hell/heaven; these flawed imperfect overall choices may be perfect for just what you need. What we actually needed was something which fit what was necessary, something which performed in our scope of need, hence the product could've been perfect, depending on its scope.

The problem, coming from the fickle minded user, who only wants "best" while not knowing what it even is, is plain greedy by nature.

What we need IS indeed the best.

But that doesn't equate the Most;

The best means the best fit.

The one which strikes Balance.

The one that reaches Enough.

Enough is Enough. be not greedy and take what u can

or greed shall take just as much from you.

Post for Toby, you've taught me something great today =) Thanks a bunch