I meant in the way of trying to innovate. But it looks like a lot more voted for direct mount brakes capable of 42mm tires on a gravel bike.

Can you say in what way you mean questionable?

Also post an example of choice 2, with perhaps a short explanation of the differences between the so-called "framesets" and what the alleged advantages/disadvantages of said differences are to the general riding public.

questionable in the sense that i question the design benefits you list.
frames you list are questionable compared to alternatives.

The Specialized Roll is an example of a bike with V-brakes and large tires. Although that particular one has a seat tube angle that might provoke my knees.

The advantages? Well, I just rode today on a gravel bike with disc brakes and was not as impressed as I thought I'd be given the kinds of comments on here about disc brakes. If direct-mount brakes for example are allegedly almost as powerful as disc brakes, then ones capable of 42mm clearance (and fenders) would be way more interesting for some people, maybe not you, but some people.

So the question is, do you want a newer gravel bike or an older CX bike with brake posts. V vs Canti isn't a thing, since we're talking frames and they both mount on the same spot.

Do what you want.

I have the #3 option with wider tires and it's pretty awesome.

I will probably get #1 at some point just because I do like the performance of disc brakes in the big mountain washboard descents. For most riding, it's negligible.

#3 sounds much much cheaper and used. Maybe easier on your wallet depending on your riding style.

#2 ? Is that a hardtail mountain bike from the 90s? I'm not sure what you think it is actually.

Why such a limited selection ?

None of the above for me.

Not interested.

Isn’t #2 just a rigid mtb?

Though getting V’s to clear the top of a 2.4 is pushing it.