[turboponyy]

I actually completely agree with both the article and your point that your code should directly communicate your intent.

The angle I'd approach it from is this: recording whether an email is verified as a boolean is actually misguided - that is, the intent is wrong.

The actual things of interest are the email entity and the verification event. If you record both, 'is_verified' is trivial to derive.

However, consider if you now must implement the rule that "emails are verified only if a verification took place within the last 6 months." Recording verifications as events handles this trivially, whilst this doesn't work with booleans.

Some other examples - what is the rate of verifications per unit of time? How many verification emails do we have to send out?

Flipping a boolean when the first of these events occurs without storing the event itself works in special cases, but not in general. Storing a boolean is overly rigid, throws away the underlying information of interest, and overloads the model with unrelated fields (imagine storing say 7 or 8 different kinds of events linked to some model).

[crazygringo]

> that is, the intent is wrong. The actual things of interest are the email entity and the verification event.

Or, your assumption about the intent is wrong. Many (most?) times, the intent is precisely whether an email is verified. That's all. And that's OK if that's all the project needs.

> Storing a boolean is overly rigid, throws away the underlying information of interest, and overloads the model with unrelated fields

Also, storing a boolean can most accurately reflect intent, avoid hoarding unnecessary and unneeded information, and maximize the model's conceptual clarity.