the only two comments I see downvoted heavily in that thread are these two at -30ish:

Losing Marth's dair sucks but everything else about PAL is good for the game tho

reminder it depends to 100% on what you are used to

I'm not going to comment on whether or not they're deserving of being heavily downvoted, but I don't think they really make good points at all. To be honest the first one reads like somebody who has never played PAL Melee in their life and the second one dismisses the idea that people can prefer things about the version they don't play.

I live in a PAL region and I think PAL is much worse overall than NTSC. The relevant balance changes indirectly buff floaties by changing the other characters, but that doesn't address the more fundamental weaknesses of the floatier characters and has a pretty significant impact on the match ups of the other characters (not only against floaties, but also each other). To oversimplify it, the changes essentially force more neutral interactions by weakening the punishes/finishers of the other top tier characters. Falcon loses weak knee to strong knee, falco loses shine to late dair pillar combo on lighter characters, sheik loses down throw aerial and her tech chases are more vulnerable to slide off DI, marth loses dair for early off stage KOs etc.

It's the reason I don't like the idea that more balanced = better. It might be more balanced overall, but is it really better when characters are more often forced back into neutral due to weakened punishes? Is it better when that balance indirectly buffs characters people generally don't like playing against and forces even more neutral interactions against them?

There's more to PAL than just Marth's dair, and there's more to version preference than just familiarity