Statistically GWF is weaker than dueling (unless theres a crit, even then a greatsword is 2 2/3 extra damage on a crit compared to dueling's 2 and let alone how much weaker is is on a greataxe RAI). Using RAW, it is equal to dueling when there is hunters mark/hex applied, and is stronger than dueling with divine smite. I would say having a fighting style that is at base weaker than another style, situationally equal, and in cases where you use more resources is slightly better isnt game breaking at all.

About the pacing, the developers stress that as their main reason in the sage advice that you linked and are basing your argument on only has a small note about it increasing damage slightly and not being game breaking.

"Having no limit would also leave the door open for Great Weapon Fighting to grant more of a damage boost than we intended, although the potential for that is minimal compared to the likelihood that numerous rerolls would bog the game down."

I never said going with RAI isnt valid. in fact, the game is valid however brings the most joy to the table. I see other DMs banning stuff like conjure animals, level 1 flying PCs, etc and those are all valid. To say that using the rules as written is explicitly wrong, especially in a discussion about RAW, not RAI, doesnt help further discussion or help players who like a structured and concise way to rule how things work.

To "Laugh [a player] out the door" is a funny way of explaining how the rules work. Again, your way of ruling things are valid and sage advice is useful for understanding design intent as well as clarifications on oddly worded things (although weapon damage dice and attack damage dice arent used interchangeably. Savage attacker and crit damage are able to be discerned exactly as written), but in a discussion of RAW if it isnt written in the rules it isnt RAW.