Not at all. First, I don't want simple bans, I simply want less bans. And second, my argument here is that how we have defined "simple" and "complex" bans is flawed, and that the end result is that the "complex" Speed Boost Blaziken ban is less confusing than the "simple" Blaze/Speed Boost Blaziken ban. Banning Blaze Blaziken makes absolutely 0 sense- you cannot explain it or argue for it without appealing to the "definition" of simple and complex bans- and we should not be content with a system that allows for completely unrelated Pokémon from being removed from play for reasons of convenience for policy makers.
Note that all three of your counter-examples are attacks, and not abilities. Blaze Blaziken CANNOT have Speed Boost under any circumstances (and the inverse is also true). Any Darkrai can forget or relearn Dark Void; Blaziken's ability is set when it is created and cannot be changed. Note also that Rough Skin Garchomp cannot have Sand Veil, which is another problem waiting to happen with the current ban definition system. [As for Unnerve Garchomp, I'm sure someone else said that earlier in the thread, but in the end it's not the point.] Appealing to wanting to prevent complex bans is kind of foolish now that we already have one.
~Uiru
Ok by your logic we'd have to test every pokemon with multiple abilities. For example, Espeon with Magic Bounce is UU but is Synchronize NU. I used Espeon in NU last gen, why can't I do it now? That's pretty much what you're saying. Now rinse and repeat for every single pokemon. It just gets massively out of hand.