Well, I'll admit that perhaps no Willytards in this thread (yet) had been shitting on Maria's CGS, it was primarily a pre-emptive strike before one of them did come in and say one of the lines they've been parrotting for the last 6 months
But I stand by that a lot of people on this board are guilty of retroactively downgrading the importance of the Career Grand Slam just because a player they don't like completed it. Variety has ALWAYS been a huge factor in determining the greats
Just look at any discussion comparing Venus and Henin; despite their tie in Slam counts, everyone (bar the Willytards) agrees that Justine is ahead by a considerable margin because her Slam record is so much better-rounded and consistent across the 4 Slams than Venus's is. And speaking of the men's -- I know someone raised the point that many would still say Sampras > Nadal because he has more Slams despite having the CGS, but I would argue that's simply because Sampras is the best of his era while Nadal is only the 2nd best, rather than Sampras's higher Slam count being considered important
OTOH, most people would say Agassi > Borg despite having 2 less Slams (and the only people who would claim Borg was greater would cite the caveat that he cut his career short while still at the top of the game, NOT that he had more Slams).
I say this 100% without my troll hat on, but I honestly believe Maria is already greater than Hingis because of the CGS, and I honestly believe just one more Slam would give her the edge over Venus, despite the latter having more Slams but a far less dynamic Slams record. (I think she'd need to get to 6 Slams before she had a case over Henin.) That's how much importance I give to the CGS