The old method deserves respect for what it solved, not immunity from what it misses.

Every established way of doing something was once an answer to a real problem. That history earns respect and explains why people defend it, since it worked, often for a long time and often better than what came before. What it does not earn is exemption from questions about the parts it never covered. Gratitude and revision can sit together.

When you inherit a procedure, ask first what it was designed to prevent. Keep that protection, then look at what has changed since it was written. And when your own method gets questioned, try hearing it as interest in the problem rather than an insult to your solution.