Your comments here - not least the rather puzzling reference to ‘bad bits of humanity’ - raise genuine doubts as to whether you have actually read through the the thread or not.

I say this because the vast majority of contributors have shown an understanding of (and in many cases, outright support for ) what was clearly a pragmatic decision on the part of BA. Indeed, the closest anyone has come to implying they might be a little unhappy is a (honestly-expressed) remark by a poster who said that they “would not be best pleased if it were to happen to me” - but even that comment came with a clear acceptance of the reasons behind the decision.

The core debate within the thread has revolved not around a contingency decision described by BA in its text message, ie to find space for extra passengers who might otherwise have been further delayed ; but as to whether any such decision should ultimately be accompanied by some form of compensation (and any legal issues that may or may not apply), in a scenario where a particular product / facility has been charged for, but may not be supplied.

As ever with FT there are, not surprisingly, nuances within the various opinions offered in the many posts the topic has generated. What is very clear however, is that nobody has expressed any feelings of horror or revulsion in the way that you yourself have conjectured. You are the only person to use this sort of emotive language and perhaps the words are therefore much more a reflection of your own perspective and apparent sense of outrage than of anyone else’s.