i feel like that makes me right to a higher extent, if the goal is to get a clear idea of which is the most important, then yeah the whole process is just to remove a complex answer in favour of a simple 1-2-3 order. your point about face is the key part of the more complicated theory- there's an order, and then there's a 'second page' that face is the only one that as you say, counters the other factors.
in essense i agree entirely i just don't see your point, outside of maybe that i said in the individual order, i put nt above face. if so then that's the point, you should not try make it a 1-2-3 order. your own explanation of face first, is the complexity that the order does not include., and then people have arguements about how robbed of that complexity, height is more important than face or nt is more important than face. but i said in my post, face is the most important, but not because a 5/10 autist is worse off than a 3/10 nt. that doesn't package as well as a 1-2-3 order though. a 1-2-3 order is nice but if you have to say it anyway, and demanding a 1-2-3 order leads to arguments all over the forum, that's dumb. that is why people make the argument one matters more than the other in the first place. if face is first but not individually worse than the others, because it has a 'second page' in which it counters any other quality, then there's no argument. if a user is non nt they argue that non nt matters more, to their own individual self who isn't 7/10 facially. they aren't right if the theory is complex, but if it is simple, then you have an argument.
