I didn't claim anything is bad, anywhere.

Also I didn't "try to use Debian in a way it wasn't inteded to be used". I am using debian on 90% of my servers/vms/containers to this day. Have been for literally decades. To give a specific example: I was running a nextcloud, which required PHP, and wanted to update that. The newer version reuqired a higher PHP version, because the currently installed PHP version was EoL and not supported anymore (by PHP maintainers or Nextcloud). So updating required removing the debian-provided PHP version and installing one from other sources (external repo or compile from source), which honestly defeats the point of a "stable" distribution if the software provided is EoL, doesn't it?

And to be clear this is just one example I can specifically remember. The "issues" I encouter when using debian are usually of that general type. And to be clear, that's mostly the point of using it on a server, where I use it, but even there it sometimes goes a bit too far.

And finally: I was originally arguing the semantics of calling debian stable and arch UNstable, which it is not. It is rolling, it might be bleeding edge. It's also isn't the same as having a stable and unstable release branch (within the same distro) when applying the label to the most stable release of different distros.