You might not want to argue about it, but you are making a very clear position on it all the same yourself.
You don't circumvent "everything", your issue is that espionage is apparently a more efficient conversion of resources than direct culture.
Put another way, how many other victory conditions are going to feel the impact from this aside from culture? Religious 100% for certain won't. UN likely won't, aside from the civic swap tricks we've already seen when necessary (mostly people pick leaders so it isn't). Domination and conquest? Espionage was likely a factor already, but the tradeoff there isn't nearly as clear (you can't get an extended tech lead with espionage, and flipping cities is slow and costly compared to taking them with units).
That leaves culture and *maybe* space, although from what I can see space would make only marginal use of it and it wouldn't alter the way people approach the game materially since the human often runs away to the point of gifting the AI techs just so it has something useful it might be able to trade, maybe.
So, you're basically against espionage because it replaces one wonky mechanic (culture) with another. But this isn't a glitch by any means; it's a fixed mechanic the devs put back into the game deliberately. It is ludicrous, absolutely ludicrous, to say that this is a broken mechanic and then turn around and run huts/events in the game. Just because espionage is the fastest route to culture by far doesn't mean it cheapens the HoF, and this is an avenue in which people can compete directly just as any other.
You are basically saying the spread culture mission is overpowered. Like it or not, that's what the argument is boiling down to for you; compared alternative means of generating
, espionage is demonstrably faster.
Temp ban my foot. There's nothing here to ban, just a more efficient means of victory in one victory condition. You think it's overpowered? I think Quechas and tech trading is overpowered, and they both are. That doesn't change the reality of their inclusion in HoF, which was intended to be a competition to achieve the best possible results, wasn't it? Someone just put together an improved methodology; the first thought should not be "consider banning it!"
1. What objective guidelines are there for banning tactics?
2. How does this tactic fall within those guidelines?
No logical answer = no justification for banning it, even temporarily.