Throughout my time on this forum, and especially recently, I've noticed something: large portions of the community have a very negative view of players making use of game mechanics in creative, unintended, beneficial ways. We see, in other games like Minecraft, a very different attitude from the community: redstoners who make automated farms for everything in the game are treated the same as any other players, or they're even admired for the amount of game knowledge they have (because making farms in games requires knowing how the game works, whether that's from research online or from personal experience). In both games, it's possible to make a farm that abuses mob pathfinding mechanics. In Minecraft, that's just seen as an everyday thing and accepted.
In DST, however, there are people who think those farms need to be "patched" out of existence, as if their existence is somehow detrimental to the playerbase as a whole despite being completely up to you to make. These people insist that the existence of such useful mechanics will somehow "force" everyone to use them. Allow me to attempt to poke a few holes in that worldview, starting off with something simple.
The above image is a farm that abuses mob pathfinding. The pigmen come out of their homes, try to get to the rot because they're hungry, but get stuck because they ignore walls. This gives the player pigmen contained, pigmen they can convert to werepigs at a moment's notice and whenever they like. It can also be scaled up to allow for more houses, with the only limit to that upscaling being the food detection range of pigmen (which'd allow for far more werepigs than even the hungriest Warly could ask for).
But this kind of farm is one you see fairly often in servers. It's very commonly used, isn't it? Should something like that be patched out? The logic of some users would dictate that it should be, but all removing this simple farm would do is make people have to wait until day to convert pigmen to werepigs. Keeping it in lets people spend less time in their base since they don't have to wait around for it to be daytime whenever they want a fresh ham bat, so it's purely positive to have it as an option. From a game design standpoint, removing it would be a bad move because it'd just inconvenience the playerbase while bringing no benefit. This is, however, a form of semi-automated farm, like you often see in Minecraft: it makes the game more convenient in exchange for the player putting in some effort to set it up.
Let's look at another one. Excuse the hasty setup for demonstration purposes, but this one, like the pigman farm, uses bait and abuses mob pathfinding to make the farm work. While walking towards a piece of monster meat, the spiders try to avoid the walls by pathfinding through the statues, which obstruct them. Then I, playing Wormwood, use a walking cane (or an ocean fishing rod - any indestructible held item works, and less damage is better) to attack a punching bag that I've equipped with a bramble husk. This procs the husk's effect, doing damage to the spiders clustered into the range of the husk. It lets me farm a virtually unlimited amount of spiders as Wormwood - I just have to replace the husks. If I add bramble traps while I'm blooming, the farm becomes both costlier to run and way faster.
This is not, however, game-breaking by any means! Other characters - Willow, Winona, and especially Wendy come to mind - can farm an unlimited number of spiders far more efficiently and for much cheaper, and some of them (Wendy) with basically zero set-up. Does the simple fact that the farm takes advantage of mobs not pathing around statues and statues being indestructible justify the removal of this Wormwood-specific farm? I would say no - in exchange for a bunch of resource and time investment, it makes me able to do Wendy's job part-time without having to play Wendy, and there's no harm in that.
Given that I've only seen one other player than myself make and use this farm, I'd say it's a pretty good example of the fact that farms like this existing doesn't necessitate their use.
Let's ask another question.
What, functionally, is the difference between encircling all of Dragonfly's ponds with walls to contain the lavae or doing the normal method, where you use a lava pond to make them get stuck? The only difference is that it's easier to do the latter before you first kill Dragonfly. It's not impossible, though - with a determined Wickerbottom who has enough Sleepytime Stories books and someone who can place walls quickly, you could manage it. You could do the same with the help of a Wormwood who has the right perks and a large quantity of moon shrooms.
Most importantly, it lets players fight Dragonfly in a way they find more fun and manageable. Dragonfly has a trickier kiting pattern than most mobs/bosses in this game since it'll follow you if you run too early, and people find mastering that pattern fun - having to deal with the lavae, though? People seem to prefer to avoid that, and the lava pond wall method lets them do so.
Fighting Dragonfly without walls is still an option for people who like it, though! That's the compromise that should exist: we give people options.
I'll finish out my examples for now with a final one: Klaus. He used to be blocked by his own stash, which allowed Wanda players to kill him without him being able to do much about it. This I actually agree with the patching of. The reason? Simple: it was a flaw in the fight itself. Klaus always stays relatively near his stash, so it's inevitable that a player will find out that he can get stuck on it, and then kiting him around it comes naturally. You don't have to go out of your way to set it up, you don't have to do anything special - you just walk so that the stash is between yourself and Klaus and bam, he can't leap at you. Klei was right to fix that, especially since Klaus isn't so punishing of a boss to fight solo that people find him frustrating or overwhelming.
And here I am, fighting Klaus as Wormwood and using moon caps to keep him from ever being able to cast a single spell. This makes the fight a lot simpler - as long as I keep them asleep (which'd be my main focus if I wasn't fighting solo), he can't cast, so he just attacks, and all I have to worry about is dodging and keeping him from getting far enough from his deer to enrage. This game is a survival sandbox with combat in it, and the devs clearly want players to get creative with that combat. Otherwise, why would they add something that lets you do stuff like this?
As such, I think we need to reconsider our collective stance against "cheese". The only bad "cheese" is the kind that you don't really have to go out of your way to do, like the Klaus stash cheese or the old Ancient Guardian pillar cheese. Crafting a hundred knight statues and farming the Shadow Pieces on a boat, though? No normal player is ever going to do that by mistake. If you do that, you know what you're doing, and if you don't, you'll probably screw it up and get deleted by all those Shadow Knights. Why not let the farmers farm if they please? It doesn't stop those who'd rather not farm from doing things the normal way, after all. There's room enough in this non-competitive survival sandbox game for people to play it differently.
Also, the lure plant cheese for Fuelweaver shouldn't have ever been patched for the same reason - you're not gonna put a lure plant in the specific spot you need to for that to work, then lead Fuelweaver behind it and escape so you can kill him from out of the arena unless you know what you're doing, so it doesn't affect anyone's enjoyment of the fight except the people who like doing it the "cheese" way.