The rule "you can only use revenge killing as an argument if the Pokemon is more dangerous than the Pokemon it is forcing out" does not apply here
Shouldn't apply ever. It's actually "you can use an example of a revenge killer if it is viable in any facet outside of the specific thing it is supposed to revenge."
If it wasn't, then we couldn't use revenge killing as an argument against the #1 most dangerous Pokemon in any tier, which is just silly.
When arguing how effective revenge killing is, you argue about the sum total of competitively viable revenge killers, not each specifically and only if each specifically is more dangerous.
That said, there is certainly a "true to the definition" counter for all sets Venusaur has: Specially bulky Rest Sleep Talk Will-o-Wisp Sludge Bomb Weezing. There is also a "mostly true to the definition" counter for all sets in 285 Speed bulky Intimidate Arcanine with Morning Sun and Flare Blitz, as it can switch into any attack (so long as you EV it to take <75% from Specs Sludge Bomb), and make a decision of whether to Flare Blitz for the KO or Morning Sun for the recovery in case Venusaur switches out.
Regarding Weezing, it beats physical, special, leech seed + synthesis (via pp stalling), and can switch in at anytime.
It is also certainly a viable Pokemon, as it offers important Fighting / Ground resists and the ability to spread Burn around. If you can't take my word for it, take Panamaxis' word, he was using it as well :P
Now, I acknowledge first that Venusaur's competitive diversity is unparalleled in UU, but I certainly do not adhere to the philosophy that the most powerful Pokemon should always be suspect. We should never be biased towards banning, and adhering to that philosophy tends to make us want to ban anything that gives us trouble.
I note that May stats and note that Weezing is only #35, and only 6.8% of this #35 used Pokemon actually use the set that counters Weezing. I also note that Arcanine is high (any set is a check to Venusaur), but less than 14% put any physically defensive EVs in.
I've watched nearly all the people who nominated Venusaur for suspect, and none of them have used Weezing or bulky Intimidate Arcanine with 285 Speed (besides like LonelyNess, but he isn't nominating Venusaur) for prolonged periods of time.
Now I'm also curious if the suspect status of Venusaur is due the fact that Venusaur forces prediction on the user; as in, you have to decide whether to switch your Pokemon that can take a Power Whip / Leaf Storm or take Sleep Powder. Is something that forces prediction really broken? I'm reminded of the Garchomp scenario, which forced prediction but where a misprediction generally resulted in a loss of a Pokemon. The Garchomp scenario was "Garchomp kills a Pokemon and cripples another most of the time" but is Venusaur really like that?
A lot of people are saying "o wow EO / Bad_Ass / Franky had such good post nominations" and all that jazz but all I took from all 3 nominations was that:
1.) Venusaur is a good Pokemon. They all listed facts about Venusaur's abilities, such as its ability to come in on Water Pokemon and force them out.
2.) Venusaur is a diversely used competitive Pokemon. They again, listed facts about Venusaur's diversity, such as the fact that Moltres hesitates to switch in because it could get KOed by SR + LO Sludge Bomb
3.) Venusaur has access to Sleep Powder, which can force the opposition to use prediction.
Rarely did I get the actual transition on how these statements about Venusaur make it
broken. I understand there is the pedantic point that suspect doesn't mean broken, but let's all be honest here, once Venusaur is made suspect we'll be discussing whether or not it is broken anyway.
"Open up holes" is one of the most general statements I see people write in suspect paragraphs all the time (including myself). I was "lucky" enough to get away with it, but unfortunately (for you guys :P) I'm going to be a little more demanding and ask
what specifically you mean by this.
Does the fact that Venusaur forces prediction, and then inevitably eventually yield a misprediction, "open up holes?" And does this open up a hole to the "garchomp level," as in you lose 1 Pokemon and have another crippled due simply to a physical or special or sleep powder misprediction?
Shouldn't something only be considered a problematic Pokemon if the misprediction yielded from its "forced prediction" consistently "opens up holes?" And what exactly is "opens up holes?"