Allegedly, on or about 08 July 2014, David Benfell sent:
This is another terminology issue, which I think should be viewed separately from the merits/demerits of systemd itself. And I'm inclined to agree that the terms are poorly chosen.
If it'd been my choice, disabled would have meant exactly what the word suggests it means to the average person, and for services that could be run on-demand, would have used a status called on-demand.
It's be enough having to put up with real world metaphors being shoehorned into computing technology (e.g. desktops, folders, and files), but it's worse when illogically applied (where "disabled" simply means "not straight away").