But my post wasn't about whether Gush warps the metagame or not, or really whether it should be restricted or not (although that could be considered a subsidiary point). Our views on either question aren't really germane, and therefore need not be resolved here. (In fact, I could strongly believe that restricting Gush is the right thing to do, and my critique of your post's logic would still stand - so it does not depend at all on our positions on Gush.)
My post was an inquiry into what restricting Gush has to do with the vision you articulated for the format. Specifically, you complained that the you don't want to play a format where you are forced to play "dual lands, fetchlands and Flusterstorm." Restricting Gush doesn't help us address that at all. In fact, it would make that specific problem worse, by the logic of Gush's most vocal critics (of Gush acting to suppress other blue decks, and that those blue decks would be stronger against Shops than Gush decks).
In a post where I took your two main points to be about a desire to increase the % of non-blue decks in the format and strengthen the Shop pillar, the discussion of Gush was a complete non-sequitur, and in fact, would move you further away from your vision.