The implied future of Marvel's main characters is related to the illusion of change that is part of this serialized genre.  The characters never get there.  You've explained that Stan Lee put the brakes on Peter Parker growing up when he realized this character could be around indefinitely.

Peter David has also tried to find a contradiction by using examples like She-Hulk and the Vision.  I don't know the Vision character that well from his origin and never read your Avengers West Coast stories about him but I know you've explained that She-Hulk had various depictions and you pulled those threads together in your series.  Simple enough to understand.  He used your first Hulk run as another example because Banner and the Hulk were separated, not something shown in Lee's initial stories.  But it's obvious that Peter David did not distinguish between temporary changes for a particular story arc or changes in external details and changes to the fundamental nature of a character.  I don't think there was a need for so much confusion over the issue when he was writing on here and his website about the topic.

In so many things there's always a thread drift, digital files get distorted over time when they're transferred from one storage to another, historical details that change over time when there's new research, and people just plainly misinterpreting what they've heard as it gets repeated down the line.  So do you think that the way these long running characters have moved so far from their original intent was inevitable?  Like Batman presented as a psychotic ninja after about 50 years of publication.  That even if there was more editorial control, the editors themselves would gradually misunderstand the characters over decades of publishing?  Maybe this is just the editors not bothering to do the research because the original stories by the creators are there to refer to.