When we get into those contexts, we can have very different conversations, until then, we have to stay in context and that context is very simple.
We have a number of posters in this thread that seem to want to have those different conversations and don't follow the logic of why we can't have them. Is it simply that it's not the context of the original post? Would a new thread titled "best practices in spring selection" be a better place for that conversation?
I can make your rig ride like shit and never touch anything but the shocks. You will not be able to fix one iota of that or affect the ride quality to any humanly discernible degree with anything else you care to change and I don't care what you want to try, it can't be done. That is why once you have them doing their job correctly of holding the rig at design height, springs cease to matter.
I have no disagreement with that, and I'm not picking up that anybody else does. But before you had the springs doing their job of holding the rig at design height, you started with a spring, and why you started with a 100 pound spring with a 20" free length instead of a 300 pound spring with a 13.33" free length (both of which have the exact same ride height) is what I think people are trying to understand, not just that you can tune a shock to work with either one. I think I have an idea (the lighter spring has way more usable travel) but I'd love that conversation to happen so I can learn the other factors involved. Like where would I start if I was suspending a 1/4 midget that looks like it might only need 2" of travel?