Cabin defects have a negative impact on pax comfort, and pax will let CC know this. Cabin defects can also increase CC´s physical workload or negatively impact the service CC are able to provide.
An ever growing list of deferred cabin problems, while not affecting the airworthiness of an aircraft, is indeed a major negative for CC.
It is management, not the engineers, who are directly responsible for the length of the DDL. Management, not the engineers, decide that the law of maximum fixing times is a goal rather than a line in the sand.
Of course, Captains have the authority not to accept an aircraft with too many (legal) cabin defects. Such a decision always makes for miraculous and quick repairs. 
To avoid thread derailment, can we please agree that the following definitions are more or less generally accepted in civil aviation?
MEL: minimum equipment list
A FAA-mandated list of aircraft equipment that must be functioning before an aircraft may legally take off with passengers. Repairs to some items not essential to an aircraft’s airworthiness may be deferred for limited periods of time approved by the FAA.
CDL -
Cabin Discrepancy Log
CML - Cabin Maintenance Log
Cabin log used by cabin attendants to record non-airworthiness discrepancies encountered in the passenger cabin and correctice actions taken by maintenance.
DDL - Deferred Defects List
Certain defects may be deferred if there is a shortfall in the parts to rectify them, or insufficient time is available to allow the engineers the opportunity to clear them. Defects should not be deferred without prior reference to and in accordance with the Minimum Equipment List (MEL) sometimes known as the Allowable Deficiency List. Deferred defects are to be listed in the appropriate section of the Technical Log to give visibility to the aircrew and ground crews. The detail recorded in the deferred defect entry will include cross references to the Technical Log page the defect was originally entered on, and a limit by which time it is to be rectified. The re-deferral of defects on reaching the target limit should not be automatic, but should be controlled by a higher authority, such as Quality Assurance. Therefore all deferred defects must be subject to review at regular intervals, and this review period should be controlled by company documentation.
EASA
Can defects that will not hazard the flight safety be deferred by the pilot according to the approved minimum equipment list "MEL"?
A pilot always makes use of the MEL, the technician proposes to defer defects according to the MEL but the pilot accepts or not. This is how the MEL works. The MEL allows continuing operation with specific equipment unserviceable when the dispatch conditions are specified in the MEL. The continuation of operation is limited by the rectification interval
Please put the MEL / DDL / LAMEs discussion to bed now and move on.