I think you mistook me. I am clearly blaming the leadership team, but not for incompetence. For actual malice. They clearly knew what they should do, and decided not to. That should be something they are punished for, not their employees.

If you're claiming malice, what's the theory of malice? Who benefits from this?

I don't have a theory... I'm just noting that professional neglect at this level is malice, whether due to laziness or actual ill intent.

Like, if I sold someone a piece of software that I knew hadn't been tested and told them it worked great, that is malicious behavior, whether my motive was to make a quick and easy buck, to eat ice cream instead of doing actual work, or to ensure that my customer failed. The behavior is malicious independent of motivation.

Malice refers to intent, the idea of "malice... without ill intent" doesn't make sense. That's why Hanlon's Razor is worded as it is. By your definition, any shoddy work could be considered malicious.

I get your point though, I think we're just arguing semantics.

"negligence" is probably the word that's being sought here.

>Who benefits from this?

Probably one of the candidates who had a decent chance of winning the Iowa primary, but was not the most likely one to be picked. I don't like throwing accusations without concrete support for them, so I will just say that the whole involvement of Buttigieg's with the app, as well as his announcement of victory last night (way before votes got actually counted), seems at least suspicious.

Though it is just as likely as simple incompetence, probably even less, so i am leaning more towards incompetence, but I cannot fully dismiss the alternative in the light of all the recent DNC events.

Remember, however, this app was commissioned by the Iowa Democratic Party (IDP), not the DNC.