The definition makes the argument here really. If being functional means that the system is functional for only a select few, then to the select few, sure it's functional, but to everyone else, it's not. If public transit is meant to be "public" and not just a "transit", then a system functional only to a few isn't what I can consider to have met expectation of its own definition. I'm certainly being strict about it, and you are free to keep your perspective; I'm not here to change it. I used to live in an area outside of Selangor where buses vanished after being virtually nonexistent, and public transit in KL & Selangor hasn't given me the slightest bit of sense that it's reliable, even before I experienced a better system elsewhere in the world.

Some part of my reason of outright calling it non-functional is political: I've set the bar higher than just having a system that works for those lucky or rich enough to live near a train or bus station. Imagine if you don't have access to the benefits of a public policy or system that only a few seem to enjoy, and these few people go around and tell others that the system is being functional. I'm not sure if that'll sit well with most people, especially when it's something that is or is close to a basic right.