Gerard ph has used documentation, some of which is Pope John Paul's own writing, to support the view that he wasn't such a traditional, conservative or particularly effective pope, contrary to what so many others seem to be proclaiming, that's all. That does not imply that Gerard ph did not accept him as pope.
The standard responses to Gerard ph's position boil down to this:
"I don't care what evidence you offer, or what objections you make, I liked him and so did many other people, in fact he was wildly popular, therefore he must have been a good pope. If you don't think he was a particularly good pope, it can't possibly for objective reasons, it must be because there is something wrong with you, because everyone else liked him."
No. I disagree.
With all of Ger's posts there was nothing to show that John Paul II compromised on Church dogma.
In all his ecumenism, John Paul II never waivered on dogma.