I didn't miss it. I have acknowledged the requirements and have challenged them.
What I am stating is that "it was in the requirements" is not a "get out of jail card" when someone says it's over-engineered.
All I'm saying is that it's a very comfortable position to abstract away personal responsibility and say "I'm not over-engineering, that's what X wants", but that's exactly how we get the over-engineered Linux-plus-wi-fi doorbells.
Don't overthink it. If you judge the engineering then you look at how the implementation reflects the requirements, not whether the requirements are good.
Over-engineered simply means there is much more in that implementation than the baseline needed to tick off the requirements.
I disagree. IMO this mindset is not how you make good engineering or good products.
As an engineer (the traditional kind), I don't really appreciate nor can I afford the "not my problem" attitude of doing engineering in a vacuum, because in the end it's my responsibility.
you’ve successfully over-engineered the whimsy and joy out of their original idea
I never claimed I wasn't over-engineering the line of thought, though. :)
I'm perfectly fine with people having fun or over-engineering stuff, I'm just pointing out that it's still over-engineered in the end. Which is 100% fine!