There comes a point in these discussions where folks start quibbling over the definitions of words like "creative." That's really not how I want to be spending the hours of my life. When a discussion reaches that point, I usually try to stop engaging.
While I have my criticisms of floating ASIs (and since this is a + thread I won't voice them here), I recognize that there are good arguments in their favor. Well, just one good argument really and that's creating the character you want. It's the whole reason I abandoned random dice rolls for attributes more than 20 years ago.
Honestly, I sometimes wonder if it's really necessary for characters to be extremely weak in some areas for them to be extremely strong in others. I get that we generally don't want perfect protagonist for any work of fiction or a game. But the system as it stands now really does encourage people to ignore the attributes that don't directly correspond with the effectiveness of their class. I'm playing a Druid in a campaign right now with a 9 Strength. Does that really make any sense? Most adventurers are young (for their race), physically fit individuals in the prime of their lives. They're physically fit because their occupation demands it. Even a Wizard needs to run from time-to-time. And yet it's completely normal to have a Fighter with a 9-10 Intelligence, a Wizard with a 9 Strength, etc., etc.
That’s more of a debate about point buy stat generation than ASIs, and it does factor in to reasons I prefer characters to be rolled. Rolled stats are independent of each other as variables.
I have a 5e dwarf cleric with WIS as his 3rd lowest stat. Does that count?
Was that with floating ASI or without?
Lack of restrictions can also breed creativity.
