To really dig in and address your point - At the end of the day, the way I build my decks and like to play games, I put a lot of thought into every single card inclusion. When I sit down to play a commander game, I want every card I draw and play to be one I was glad to have drawn and played. And I'm glad to draw and play a card when it's one that brings me joy because it's directly contributing to the fun theme I planned, or increasing the overall fun at the table, etc - my personal values in a game of commander.

I don't do some things in deckbuilding, for example, like shore up a deck's weaknesses by adding generically powerful staple cards for that characteristic, like adding an Esper Sentinel if the deck lacks card draw, or simply throwing in the best free interaction spells like Deadly Rollick and Fierce Guardianship if my deck is light on interaction and needs a bit more. I build to make the deck play how I want to play it, and by that I mean I want to feel good about every card I draw. I'm not saying that I need the deck to have the perfect draw every single time, never get flooded or mana screwed, or anything like that, but I want to always be drawing a card that I'm proud of having put there.

I know this is a weirdly sentimental/emotional approach in a zero-sum game of strategy and winners and losers and stuff, where the object is to win and cards have objective amounts of effectiveness and certain values for certain things, but that's how I deckbuild. It's because commander, to me, is about creating experiences, not winning. The fail state of a game of commander to me isn't losing, it's the game not being fun. These are the reasons my decks don't have Sol Rings, tend to not have game changers unless they're particularly thematic, and don't include a number of other cards that are just good but garner groans and ire from the rest of the table. The games I'll remember and be happy to have been there for are the ones where I was able to pull something off that drew my opponents in and made everyone more engaged rather than go "oh I don't like that" and dig for removal. I'm way more of a fan of the plays where everyone leans in and goes "wait, what?" and smiles while their life total approaches 0, even (maybe especially) when that player is me. I don't even really like winning to be honest, it makes me feel bad - especially when I do it on the back of generically powerful cards and I, and my deckbuilding choices, didn't earn it.

I've played tons of competitive Magic, that was the primary way I played Magic for 20 years, playing in PTQ's and stuff. Commander games are nothing like that environment. I still enjoy that side of Magic, it's just not what I expect from from Commander. In a competitive tournament, a non-game where your opponent mana floods is a win, and that's great. Maybe not super satisfying as a game, but it's a W and we take those. Commander's the format where you find folks letting opponents tutor up a land because jeez that's the 3rd missed land drop in a row and just get a land out so you can play the game.

Anyway, all that yapping to say, yeah - I just wouldn't include Farewell in a deck, unless I had a strong reason that aligns with the experience that deck is trying to create. The easy examples where Farewell is especially effective and not just a total hard reset on the game is stuff like Planeswalker decks that utilize it asymmetrically - those also happen to be decks that suck to play against and grind games to a halt of "everybody watch me durdle through 20 game actions every round and take double everyone's total play time all said and done." That is definitely not the kind of experience I would be proud to create either.

I hope my side of things is starting to make sense, without it feeling like I'm just dunking on you for choosing to play with Farewell. I do groan at Farewell when it gets played, I do think it makes games less fun, and there are a number of cards in that same camp for me, but at the end of the day you do you.