1. Right
2. Right
3. I wouldn't say worthless but it has the potential to create a confusion factor.
4. Right

I'm not sure of the reason of the flack either but I intend to roll with it. Hindsight is 20/20 and so on. And sure, you have to weigh-in what might be extremely important to one fellow might not be a big deal to 98% of other users.

I think the ONLY realistic way to offer a remap is to offer it as optional by some means. The problem to wrestle with is that currently all the ways to provide a remap are confusing and/or require 3rd party solutions. This is, of course, if it were to be provided externally.

The easiest method to implement is an alternate obj of some sort (RTEncoding) or a .uvs file (UVMapper). Both require the user to correctly use 3rd party software. Not a terribly good option here because of user error or some reason RTEncoder/UVMapper won't work for one or more folks.

The other option is to provide 2 more cr2s, pointed to OBJs with different mapping. Ball of confusion here for end users and for vendors. Which Michelle do I use? Which Michelle do I support? And it basically leads to "I just won't bother".

I'm not prone to allow Michelle to be remapped to nullify existing texture sets.

.