I could not agree more! And I think this comes about from the UX correctly identifying a critical frustration but them failing completely to address it in a good way.
The purpose is of cause to avoid a frustrated user who clicks delete on something that cannot be deleted. But when a user does that it’s because they want to delete it. So what the UI should do is: 1 gray out the button to clearly communicate “this is an option that you do not have” and on a mouse over communicate what privilidges you lack. Then on the disabled button put a drop down or something that provides a path for you to temporarily or permanently gain the needed privilidges.
The idea here is to make it clearly visible what is going on and provide a way to rectify it. Instead of silently hiding the options that are not currently possible.
The purpose is of cause to avoid a frustrated user who clicks delete on something that cannot be deleted. But when a user does that it’s because they want to delete it. So what the UI should do is: 1 gray out the button to clearly communicate “this is an option that you do not have” and on a mouse over communicate what privilidges you lack. Then on the disabled button put a drop down or something that provides a path for you to temporarily or permanently gain the needed privilidges.
The idea here is to make it clearly visible what is going on and provide a way to rectify it. Instead of silently hiding the options that are not currently possible.