I was just proving a point that it is possible to change the layout simply by resizing the browser window which can trigger less than ideal looking results. If I can do that deliberately, then someone else could arrive on the website at that window size and see the layout in that way and just assume the website is supposed to look like that. To me this is proof that in that case making the website respond to browser width is actually at the cost of the design its self.
How do you define responsive design? To me it is a website which responds to the type of device it is viewed on - rather than simply the width of the browser window as I think there is a big difference.
So the same website can be displayed to best make use of the type of experience you get from that device.
The main point I was making which of course is only my opinion and is only really just to balance the argument since everyone seems to only see the benefits of 'responsive design': I think making it possible to view a mobile layout on desktop is perhaps taking things too far. Since a desktop is capable of much more than this. The way I would prevent this from happening from a technical point of view (as a starting point at least) is focus more on what a device (desktop, tablet or mobile etc) would be capable of displaying by using standard media query max-device-width / min-device-width properties rather than max-width / min-width since this provides the actual maximum width the device can display. I.e on my desktop it would be 1920px wide which this fact alone means it doesn't have to respond to the point that the layout resembles one found on a mobile optimised website. With this information I could tailor the desktop layout to better match the screen area of a desktop, saving the more mobile friendly layouts for the smaller devices i.e mobiles. Having tighter control in this way would help prevent random gaps such as on the Time magazine website.
I have lots to read up on this from a technical point of view, so have probably missed quite a lot of things out but it was really just the concept of what responsive design is, to me anyway. I am not saying I am right and don't wish to cause an argument with anyone, only a good debate.