Just like everything else in life, different people have different borders and that's fine.

I don't understand the point of this thought experiment. Are you trying to disqualify the idea of boundaries because they're imperfect (which is a very flawed argument) or are you going somewhere else I can't figure out at all?

I agree there might be a more or les arbitrary border, and it will probably be in different places for different people.

However the original statement:

> The CEO’s extracurricular activities are none of my business.

Basically says that no border should exist, and it makes no difference at all who provided the service as long as the service itself is excellent.

That is a fundamentally different argument that I very much disagree with.

Every time you use a kitten to support flawed logic, a kitten dies.

I don't really understand the point you're trying to make with that thought experiment.