Would you still buy the EF-S 17-55mm 2.8 IS USM?

In my country, they sell it used at half the price of a brand new one, about 400 USD. I might buy it in that condition, but not brand new. Had it when I was still using crop and paid about 1100 USD 5 years ago. It is what I consider as my worst camera gear purchase ever. The reason for this is not its optical performance which was quite good back then and is still okay now. The primary reason is my style of shooting wherein the lens was a nice walkaround lens but I always find myself using the 10-22 when I need to go wide as well as using the 50 or 85 if I need to shoot portraits or other short telephoto shots. For my style of shooting, it was often not wide enough for wideangle applications and its aperture was not fast enough for taking portraits. I guess I am one of the guys who found a general purpose lens to be not that useful - I am sure other people will have a different style and requirement. The secondary reason is its build quality. When I first unboxed it, I cursed because the build quality of my 18-135 lens back then was better. The materials on the lens seemed cheap, it did not felt solid in the hands and later on it developed an awful zoom creep which happened every time the lens faced downwards.

With the above said, I will most likely buy a used <200 USD 18-135 IS STM instead if I wanted a general purpose lens. This or one of the Tamron/Sigma 17-50 2.8 IS lenses which are quite cheap but does 90% of what the Canon does. But then again, I will just stick with an UWA and a couple of prime portrait lenses as what I did with my full frame system.

Side Note - I went to Japan 2 years ago. Tested al my camera gear beforehand and everthing worked. Day 1 and the Canon 17-55 malfunctiioned - its flex cable for aperture control gave up so I was not able to shoot it at any aperture except wide open at 2.8. I thought it was the end of the world as we looked forward all year for that vacation but then I just adjusted and used my 10-22, 50 and 85 lenses. In think there was only one scene where I could have used the 17-55 as I needed something in between 22 and 50 but apart from that, the results were very good. It made me realize that I do not really need an all purpose zoom for my needs...which again will be different from other photographers.