No flips for you!
If "metagaming" is a problem, it's because of the DM.if all RPG decisions include metagame considerations, as you state, which presumably also includes the design portion, somehow the referee is responsible for this?
Unless the referee takes the extraordinary steps to re-write the rules, create ‘metagameless’ scenario, ( which is impossible in your formulation as all decisions have metagame considerations), and replace natural language with a Wittengstein approved logical vessel....then the referee is ‘at fault’.
For folks advocating this position, do you pay your DM’s and offer health and retirement benefits, as this is more of a workload than full time employment.
Blinded is a condition in 5e. If PC1 creates an effect that blinds PC2, politeness dictates PC2 acknowledges this turn of events in the shared narrative. So the DM is responsible for allowing the Blinded condition?
I don’t expect Blinded PCs to play with their eyes closed, but as anyone who has ever ran a battle in magic darkness or against Invisible foes, PCs even with disadvantage, still hit more often, target the correct square, more often than if you did require the players to play with their eyes closed.
Inherent in Ovin’s position, is the idea that the point of the game is to make the optimal choice.
I disagree with this. Just like playing chess with your 5 year old niece is probably not about making the optimal move, but more about fun....I think D&D falls more into a category like playing chess with a child.
There a huge area for slop if we don't stick to a common definition of metagamin, hence why I use quotation marks to indicate a specific use, ie where use of non-character knowledge is deemed a problem.