PSA: Arguing against a certain change is not arguing for it to stay the same

If there's one kind of... "logical fallacy" that I see way too many people on here make, is assuming that someone arguing against a certain change is in support of the way it exists now.

For example, someone might say something like: "Yorick's new W is broken and shouldn't exist!" A common reply you might see on here would be: "It's better than the old W! Do you like no-counterplay instant ranged poke?" That reply is not good. If someone argues against, for example, Yorick's W, that does not necessarily mean they are arguing in favor of the old Yorick W.

We need to get out the the mindset that there are only two options, that what Riot decides to do is the only other option than the way it is now. You can say that you don't like a certain rework without being completely opposed to a rework for that champion at all.