I just went back and checked, they ain't. Asura and Sumitpo have countered them pretty extensively (to the point that I didn't express my own gripes with them because they were basically 100% covered) and you haven't really countered much or any of that.
They certainly responded to them, but not really countered them, no. There were a small amount that had additional context I was unaware of, but a large amount of the rebuttals essentially amounted to "this is lifting strength" which I addressed, and many of the discrepancies in power are far far too vast to justify with minor objections like "this is a earlier in his career" which just isn't adequate to explain something like the difference between planetary level power and universal power, given how in-verse itself there's very little to any indication of these characters increasing billions of orders of magnitude in power during these periods of time. Early GL may have been weaker than a more mature Hal Jordan, but we never get the impression of either A) Early Hal is an absolute amoeba relative to any experienced GL, or B) The rest of the GLC is an amoeba compared to an experience Hal, which is what would have to be true if he went from "struggles with planets" to "can destroy the universe" over the course of a few years.
So what? If the rationale is correct then the feat is correct
Quite often the rationale isn't correct, or itself turns into an anti-feat. Such as Ion being able to recreate the universe, which was only possible due to absorbing many GL-level power sources, which is pretty explicitly an anti-feat against GL being universal. In fact Eficiente and Ant did very thoroughly what you are claiming was done to the counter-feat list, but instead of just saying it was Lifting Strength, outliers, or before a certain power up, there's actually a lot of really bad reasoning that goes into many of these feats, such as the Tesseract feat which essentially is saying "this guy is power by a gem that has infinite space, therefore anyone who can fight him can destroy universes" which is pretty ridiculous.
And it warrants consideration that we are here after culling the majority of the original feats, which were even worse than these ones. I understand Ant's concern, because while a small handful of these feats could actually be chalked up to a difference in opinion or perspective, we have several "agrees" on feats that are quite blatantly not valid in any way.
We have a set of characters here who pretty routinely treat planetary feats as the peak of what they're able to pull off, and a whole host of them all trace their current Solar System level tier back to Alan Scott, who has a single statement implying that the power-source in his chest, if not contained by his willpower (if he dies) would destroy the solar system. It is genuinely the case that all of these characters are already tiered considerably above their abilities based on a generous interpretation of a single statement.
It does appear to be the case that this thread might pass, but that'd be really unfortunate, because it simply won't be accurate. It's already pretty far removed from their actual showings in comics, and imagining them as universal gets even further from the truth.
