>Having an agenda simply means wanting something. If you do not want anything, then you do not have an agenda. If you do, you have one. By your own admission, you want something, and if you did not, you would not be discussing in this thread.
Being biased is pretty much a part of the human condition since we are limited, finite beings. Do you have all the information? Are you certain you have all the information? Have you taken into account everyone's wishes, desires, needs, analyzed every possible scenario in existence according to some yet-unspecified objective reasoning system? Then you are biased. You are missing something, you are concluding something erroneously. (using the generic you as a stand-in for anyone)

No. statements of observation do not have agendas. "The sky is blue" is a statement without an agenda. Statements can be made separate from agendas, which makes the statement unbiased.

>Being biased is pretty much a part of the human condition since we are limited, finite beings. Do you have all the information? Are you certain you have all the information? Have you taken into account everyone's wishes, desires, needs, analyzed every possible scenario in existence according to some yet-unspecified objective reasoning system? Then you are biased. You are missing something, you are concluding something erroneously. (using the generic you as a stand-in for anyone)

This is completely false. Biased, means a leaning of ones mind towards a particular viewpoint. People usually use this word in the context of a leaning of ones mind despite being aware of evidence to the contrary or lack of supporting evidence. If the mind does not lean then it is unbiased.

Your judgement of the statement has leaning towards your agenda despite you being aware of lack of evidence supporting it. My statement does not have leaning.

>Your agenda is to incorporate a pixel-level API into the web. And that's okay. Mine is to prevent the web into devolving into an opaque black box. That's okay too.

This "agenda" had nothing to do with my observations, but for yours it colored your interpretation of words. Your observations were biased, mine were not. This is not something that is Okay. Biased observations are usually false.

Given at face value the sentence is referring to a world of engineering with the context of the web as a specific example out of a more general point. You need to make a biased modification to the sentence in order for it to fit your world view.

>As to the topic at hand, I won't try dissecting comments word for word, because I think this is a loss of time and devolves into a lot of who-said-what, when we can sidestep it by concentrating on the most charitable explanation.

The most charitable explanation is here:

Given the original sentence we are referring to:

"You're not advocating for a bold, artistic world when you talk about engineering things to pointlessly exclude people."

The terms:

"Bold artistic world" "engineering things"

under your biased agenda becomes:

"Bold artistic web" "engineering web pages"

Which makes the original sentence become:

"You're not advocating for a bold, artistic web when you talk about engineering web pages to pointlessly exclude people."

You applied context to the statement relevant to your agenda. I did not. There is no doubt when I say that your perspective is in alignment with your agenda given lack of supporting evidence within the sentence itself. When you are biased you are unaware of it.

Definitively from the logic your statement is biased, mine is not.

>Specifically, I do not think he was arguing doubling or tripling a movie budget in order to make another similar movie for blind people. But then again, we weren't talking about movies. We were talking about web sites, in which the loss of HTML would lead to a net loss compared to what we have now.

Earlier you were rude to me. Therefore I don't care to debate this topic with you. Keep your opinion. I care little for it. If you had chosen more wisely earlier I would have gladly engaged with you on this very topic but since you chose not to, there is now zero possibility of further discussion on this topic.