I've read this thread since it's inception.
As a passenger, I would be incensed to find a flight continued after an engine failed, whether it was a 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 or other number engined aircraft. Apparently, the regulations don't define the difference between "you can do it, or should you do it?"
I wouldn't embark on a drive across west Texas with one cylinder of my car's engine inoperative, or one tire known to have a slow leak- and the consequences on the road of complete shutdown are a lot less.
I agree with 411A- who has the job experience- it's just plain imprudent.
How much more inconvenient for the passengers was the diversion to MAN vs. returning?
The engines are what make it go- that's fairly basic.