Protecting the dropouts

"I'd find it more satisfying to look at a dirty bike"

You might find it satisfying to look at a dirty bike, other might find it satisfying to look at a polished frame from 1932, others still a perfectly formed drop out in pristine condition, and others still a perfect TDF carbon fantasy bike . . . and so on.

The issue is that you ascribe function as the value here, others ascribe form.

I used 'satisfying' as it was the word used by singspeed in a post quoted by yourself, so there's no need to reiterate the fact that some people find the unsullied objects preferable. Yes, I'm generally more turned on by function - perhaps because I'm emotionally placated by activity - but there's still an appreciation of form; it just happens to be form placed in a functional context rather than a rarified/abstracted one. I have a titanium bike, FFS. I love the way it looks. But I also love the way it rides. If it didn't get ridden, being able to look at it would not be reason enough to keep it (although that's partly economics); unless perhaps that day came many years down the line, and sentimental value was an issue (mentioned by singspeed upthread).

This is all very interesting, but I have to go to bed. My hours are all out of whack, and I need to taken my son to nursery first thing tomorrow. It can be quite a traumatic experience due to some of the other parents :/