What? No, it can't. Both fit those classes well. In what way is a drunk guy good at tanking? Vengeance makes as much sense as retribution tanking. Yes, it would. Hunters really aren't about fighting in the fray and deliberately drawing attention. Stop harping on about how "survival" means tanking. Like I said, it originally referred to the uitilitarian nature of the spec. Newsflash: every spec in the game, no matter the role, is meant to survive in combat. Survival does not specifically imply tanking. It's a simplistic and asinine take; plain and simple.

Melee spec that isn't about being in the fray and drawing attention you say? Sure, but rogues take that spot, with much more utility. Also, imagine having a spec called "survival" that is worse at surviving than a clother. Sure, rename it to something more fitting.

that gave the bat signal for every roleplaying idiot with a "radical new vision" for Hunters to dump their unwelcome ideas on the class. The message was that if one of the game's most popular and well-established ranged specs could abruptly be turned into a niche melee spec, anything goes. This is why this spec in particular sees a constant stream of outrageous and nonsensical suggestions. Blizzard managed to normalise it. Personally, I'm sick of Survival being an experimental dumping ground.

When blizz decided to make it a melee spec, it was to make it more distinct from MM. Now, given that the spec in terms of class fantasy is about being prepared to a fight using your traps and utilities, the implementation does not reflect the class design. Yes, you have some utility, but it's nothing compared to other melee specs. Imo surv still is an experimental dumping ground with no real, fleshed out design. This tank idea is just an idea trying to give the spec something to actually stand out among other melee specs.

On a side note, i'd rather have "roleplaying idiots" putting out ideas about specs than a bitter comment saying Blizzard designed everything perfectly.