This is like part 3 of the DM Authority trilogy, at least for as long as I've been present on the site. Which hasn't been long, but whatever.
Anyway, I would single out "Player" and "referee" in those definitions. The DM's job is to keep the engine running, but they are simply a player with more responsibilities, whose job it is to make decisions on whichever issues. The DM has authority to "end" a discussion with their say so, but nowhere in the DMG or PHB does it imply being the only hand on the wheel for the whole experience. Anything beyond the definition is personal style, and IMO I prefer the mutual-construction flexibility approach. "Absolute authority" is coming on a little strong, and I don't approach the position thinking about it like that. In the quest for "having a good time," how much does this come up? I guess it depends on the group, but still.
Generally, in my understanding of your position, I think it's a hair too much in the DM's court. It all depends on what's being shot for by each group. I'd be fine with fiddling with the setting of the campaign in the name of increasing a player's fun, because the work being put into it doesn't decrease my fun. That's purely hypothetical, because I leave blank space for future development in my settings, and generally I incorporate most DnD-associated things in it already.
Anyway, I would single out "Player" and "referee" in those definitions. The DM's job is to keep the engine running, but they are simply a player with more responsibilities, whose job it is to make decisions on whichever issues. The DM has authority to "end" a discussion with their say so, but nowhere in the DMG or PHB does it imply being the only hand on the wheel for the whole experience. Anything beyond the definition is personal style, and IMO I prefer the mutual-construction flexibility approach. "Absolute authority" is coming on a little strong, and I don't approach the position thinking about it like that. In the quest for "having a good time," how much does this come up? I guess it depends on the group, but still.
Generally, in my understanding of your position, I think it's a hair too much in the DM's court. It all depends on what's being shot for by each group. I'd be fine with fiddling with the setting of the campaign in the name of increasing a player's fun, because the work being put into it doesn't decrease my fun. That's purely hypothetical, because I leave blank space for future development in my settings, and generally I incorporate most DnD-associated things in it already.