What I'm deducing here is we might be losing context a little bit. I "think" Scott is coming from more of a live FRFR standpoint and playing with the band, mix, at live band volumes. One thing I've noticed about Scott's settings is when I crank up my monitors and FM kicks in, then those settings do sound good to me, as they tame some of the high end among other small differences. Also keep in mind, it's mainly directed at using with the NF/FF mix.
Cliff "might" be coming more from the direct recording standpoint, which is usually a much lower volume and therefore those stock settings might be more applicable. Also, Cliff is probably not using a NF/FF mix all the time like Scott is.
The "trust your ears" method still applies, but I think it makes sense to decide FIRST what your context is, use the 'science' as a starting point, then go from there. One thing I'm noticing along the way is patches sound different at different volumes (obviously) and in different settings/mixes/monitoring. I do agree that simplifying this box into an "use your ears" method is not a reality for most people. Either you don't have the time to tweak tweak tweak (and your ears will fatigue before too long anyways), or you'll end up like me and you don't know when to stop tweaking. Sometimes I think something sounds good, come back the next day and it needs more tweaking... it can be a never ending cycle. So, it helps to have a scientific starting point, which should get you in the vicinity, then from there you can try a few tweaks.