That's what I was trying to say. If someone gets the drop on you, having one in the chamber isn't likely to make any difference because you won't even have a chance to draw. The BG will get what he wants (unless you're the guy in Infidel's avatar

).
If you're at home, then you're probably not carrying, and "watching" the BG do his thing. This is an example of what I called "the second scenario". This BG probably did not enter silently, so you had time to become armed. But, perhaps the OP has no problem keeping one in the chamber when the gun is at home. The question was about
while carrying.
True. But, again I was submitting that not everyone wants to be
that prepared. The discomfort with carrying with one in the chamber may outweigh their desire for "ultimate" readiness. They can decide to risk scenario one, and at least be prepared for scenario two.
To what extent have you protected your home against burglary? Could you have done more? Do you have burglar bars? High end alarm system? Deadbolts on all doors? Guard dog? A moat? Someone's choice to be less prepared is no more wrong than your choice to carry .xx cal versus .yy cal.
This case does not support carrying a round in the chamber. You had plenty of time to get the gun ready.
This case does support keeping a round in the chamber. And, you said yourself, "making your own life and death decisions".
I share your opinion. One in the chamber makes the most sense to me, too. My point is that not everyone is comfortable doing so, and that doesn't make them "wrong" or guilty of making a poor decision. Carrying without one in the chamber is NOT dumb or foolish - it may just be a compromise that an individual has to make to at least have some protection. Again, it's better to have some protection than none at all.
Perhaps it was this incident that changed your position on the matter. You have valid reasons for your position. That still doesn't mean it works for everyone.
Thanks for acknowledging that. That was the core of my point.
That's an unfair generalization. A gun without a chambered round is not always just a fancy stick. For the umpteenth time

, in some situations, yes - in others, not at all. The individual needs to decide how far he's comfortable with going to protect himself. Don't forget that there are many gun owners out there (myself included) who could but don't carry. Are we "wrong" for not carrying? The answer is no. We are just unwilling to go that far in the pursuit of self-protection. Maybe I'll decide it's worth the compromises necessary to carry. Maybe an incident will push me to that change of heart. Maybe the OP will be convinced to carry with one in the chamber. But it's his choice, and he's not wrong for choosing differently than you.