.... then all you brave guys can do a "3 engine ferry" if you like.
But it looks like you were not a brave guy. In fact it looks like you are saying that you did something that you thought then, and now, was unsafe. Which raises questions about other issues. Do you think that 3 engine ferry flights are unacceptable and that they should be banned?
When you say
I liked AIM by IBM's idea about NOT using the redundency for commercial purposes.
you may like the notion, but this is just words. If you operate an aircraft with an "allowable" defect, you are trading redundancy for commercial purposes (the "risk" is deemed acceptable). There are criteria for judging the risk to be acceptable, just as there are criteria for judging some risks to be unacceptable.
The attractive phrase "NOT using the redundancy for commercial purposes" applies to all such examples, but it brings no clarity whatsoever to the different safety issues and the different levels of risk that apply. Which was my point in my earlier post above.