OK, so your arguments against a DQ are:
1) He already got a “4 shot” penalty...isn’t that enough punishment?
2) The incorrect scorecard rule is outdated anyway and shouldn’t exist.
3) Tiger’s drop would have been in accordance with the rules in “most” situations.
I would have been OK with either ruling, but to me these are not convincing arguments.
So let me get this straight: you are in favor of the max penalty assessment in all situations. Are you going to take that stance the next time you have a run in with an ordinance of some kind? You know, IRS, speeding, homeowners association, etc? You are going to volunteer to take the most severe penalty available? I guess so.
My point is, his infraction was so nuanced that even the Masters Committee wasn’t sure it was an infraction for a couple of hours - and such an infraction should be penalized - but I don’t think the electric chair (the DQ equivalent in a golf tournament) is the appropriate penalty. Moreover, in the US Open, the PGA, or the British Open, there would have been a rules official with every group. The Masters chooses not to do that to keep the inside the rope area less populated for image purposes - therefore, they believe that they share some culpability here in the event.
Actually, all of those 3 points support the conclusion that was reached...maybe not any single one by itself, but they do all point to reasonable mitigation.