How much self-inflicted punishment can your organisation take ?

Is this a potential problem in software "development" ?

There's an anti-aircraft system on the roof of your director's house. It fires salvoes of surface-to-air missiles.

Someone created "tactics cards" explaining how to fire salvoes with an "angular spread" of 360 degrees.

There's some sort of a caveat on using a spread of greater than 120 degrees. (Software hasn't been warranted for greater than 120 degree spread).

Someone (a rogue developer ?) has already changed the system so it allows a spread of 240 degrees.

Instead of changing it back to 120 degrees, your trusty office psychopath ask you to change it to 360 degrees, explaining that "squadron" distrust the software anyway and only fire with a spread of 0 degrees.

You wonder to yourself, is this the meaning of "360 degree feedback"..

I don't understand the question. Is there some reason to never allow an angular spread of 360 degrees? It seems to me that there are desperate situations where you may want to do that. If it's incapable of performing a 360 degree spread that's a different story but you are not clear on what the actual issue is. Maybe I'm just not familiar enough with AA terminology, is the spread vertical or horizontal or both?
...
When the requirements are that unclear it's difficult not to punish yourself, intentionally or otherwise.

In my organization human torture is a routine part of the work, since some peolpe seem to enjoj thrashing and torturing others

'There's some sort of a caveat on using a spread of greater than 120 degrees. (Software hasn't been warranted for greater than 120 degree spread).'

'The system's "supposed" to work for 360 degrees.'

So which supposition is true, the caveat or the tactics cards. Who is that someone. If it voids the warranty on the purchased product, who do you sue for damages.

i do have a organisation so this don't affect me