In evaluating the proposed model for DDHG-DisHarmony, McKee concludes that while he will get the job done, the purpose of the site cannot be achieved in its currently proposed state due to human nature when dealing of romantic relationships and ending them. Let's examine this argument and the method by which it reaches this conclusion. McKee says designing a typical database access website, with members-only access to data, will be sufficient to store and transmit the required information. However, this is not the basis of his argument. First, McKee recognizes the distinction between the nature of the relationship between users of the Deadbeat database and that of future users of DDHG-DisHarmony. While a predominantly professional relationship exists between landlords and tenants, the relationship between potential users of DDHG-DisHarmony is of a more personal and romantic nature. Based on potentially limited and distorted personal experiences, McKee argues that the end of such relationships produces some form of painful exchange. He states that evidence for this claim is readily available on various social networking sites, such as Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter. However it fails to elaborate or provide precise examples, but instead makes a broad generalization of the type of traffic these sites typically experience. McKee then states that there is little chance of an amicable end to a romantic relationship. The resulting anguish and resentment intensify the social need of human beings to "get things off their chest." Use this statement to imply that the original purpose of DDHG-DisHarmony will be damaged. He then attempts to support this claim with a series of distorted and unverifiable communications… mid-paper… active communication; and that humans are social creatures with an incessant need to convey their emotions and experiences. By making these assumptions, we could see the supposed validity of his argument that the site's purpose cannot be achieved in its currently proposed state due to human nature when it comes to romantic relationships and ending them. However, his argument is invalid. We can imagine a scenario where DDHG-DisHarmony users have never started a romantic relationship with each other or where that relationship has not yet ended. His argument is also unfounded, as many of his claims are based on personal prejudices and opinions and are not verifiable in the real world. While McKee raises many interesting and valid social and ethical concerns, he does not present a strong or valid argument against implementing the proposed DDHG-DisHarmony site..