Not really. I can agree that "building a reasonably efficient character and not gimping yourself" by making your primary ability scores highest - as you are advised to do in the PHB - is not power gaming.
Good then.
Up thread your actual words implied that choosing an alignment of ASI and efficacy in play, was always power gaming. If true, the order of choosing race, class, and score allocation doesn't change that. I feel like your position has changed and I certainly would not find fault for that or hold you to any previous position.
No, you twist my words and do selective quoting, so you might get that impression, but it's only you.
From the OP - "For some reason the world comes together to mandate one very important rule that will permeate all societies for the endless future. Oddly, this declaration reflects how WotC is allowed to present character options during creation in their D&D game. There can only be ONE official method."
Nothing here about future edition in particular. See above, you are doing it again, both to the OP and myself.
I very happily agree that there are a wide range of behaviours. In saying that, I cannot help but recall with irony that you recently very firmly told me that there was no such wide range of behaviours.
Sorry, but no, this is again you inventing things.
That you knew player motivations better than they knew themselves, and any alignment of scores with efficacy in game must amount to power gaming. You don't recall making those arguments up-thread? Comments like "...it still boils down to exactly one thing: "I want a 16 because others can have it, and the game is unappealing to me because I am not as powerful as others (coud be)"?
That is my thought about floating ASIs, how does this invalidate that there are whole ranges of power gaming ?
Do you recall your words up-thread that "let's look at rolling stats, which is still the only default option in the game. I'm not sure how many people are using this, in percentage. There are lots of people who use it for power reasons, because it's the only way in the rules to get really powerful scores..." Is it right to say that over the course of our conversation, you have changed your mind?
No, but you have changed my text, and in particular just snipped that quote exactly when I started explaining what was happening. As multiple other persons wrote, the problem is usually not ONE option in particular (individually, the options are usually fairly well proof-read and playtested), it's the combination that creates problem.
In this case, powergamers don't like rolling if they can't modify the scores after, as they are stuck with odd scores which cause them problems especially when forcing them to thing ASI vs. Feat. It also disrupt the builds that they find on the internet and confuses in particular those who are mainly copycats. But if combined with the Floating ASIs that allow them to customise the scores however they want after rolling, and getting rid of at least one odd score and pumping that 18 to 20, then it's the best combination ever.
So why don't you go back to the topic at hand and stop nitpicking every single word I write, especially if it's to change them, selectively quote and misinterpret ?