Very true. A lot of data isn't there. You can infer some of these things and make decisions using business intelligence. Everyone is going to do that to a different degree, with different objectives and parameters at their disposal.
Conversely, we can only make choices that we have with the data we have available to us. Some people will pursue additional data, others will act upon the data that they have availably.
I see one response as being emotional, the other as being pragmatic. I'm a data analyst with a history of being a process-enhancer and business analyst in my professional career, so perhaps my brain works differently for these sorts of decisions, I don't know.
I certainly agree that games are different from raw activity, and you can have all the raw activity in the world and it all be meaningless if the game isn't fun and cherished by a passionate audience.
Splinterlands is a really great project because we have individuals from all sides of the fence embedded within the game world.
One side will try to rally the forces of the majority to make a change, another might just buy a larger stake in SPS and power their way through a vote. In a governance system or a DAO, it is still vulnerable to a 51% attack (or in this case, a 67% attack).
There will always be compromise, and that's a good thing. Compromise is how we end up making progress and don't come to a productivity standstill as humans.