For anyone not familiar with the term, Chesterton's Fence is the idea that you should understand why a rule exists before trying to remove it or work around it: https://fs.blog/chestertons-fence/

Here the issue is not that the rule was removed, but that the code followed the wording while missing the reason the rule existed.

First day, a monkey climbs the scale, gets the banana and is happy.

Second day, they start spraying whomever gets on the scale. Monkeys hate this. They learn not to climb.

Third day, they take a monkey out and replace with another. The new monkey sees a banana up there and tries climbing the scale. He literally gets beaten out by the others, like "seems like you're new here".

Days 4-12, they've replaced one monkey per day, so that no monkey was here when it was possible to get the banana. None of them have ever been sprayed either. Still, they enforce the rule not to climb up there.

I am putting this example because in our society as well, there are many rules that are enforced without anyone questioning the "why". Yet the "why" is often more important to know than the rule itself.

Designers know this dichotomy between the "why" and the "how". Most people don't.

Another example of why technical writing is difficult, I think.