Both are opinions, therefore disputable.

The dispute falls into two categories at least.
1. Unfair selection process/system. (short time controls, hand-picking, knock-outs with insufficient chances etc.). The title is dispute.
2. Lack of participation (due to split, contractual obligations, uncertainities, venue etc.) The title is dispute as well.

Should the dispute be purely on the grounds of lack of participation, a unification would have rectified it and made the title an undisputable one. That is not the case here.

So, bottomline is:
==================
1. Either consider no one champion. OR
2. Consider all champions world champions. After all it is not entirely their fault.

I rest my case.

That's the puzzling thing. In the past it's been 'exempted' from the rule... or you could say the rules have been broken.

Personally I never imagined that it would be graded, just on instinct. Was kinda surprised some people seemed to KNOW that it would be... and some of those are official graders who know about rules.

I'm a bit more surprised Gib wasn't graded though-arbiters being a bit slow there I think!

Yeah, you could say that. Or it could even be the rule was not in effect at all (as someone puts it in DD) considering the grading of submissions well into March. The submission report link is in DD. But then that raises the question why Linares has not submitted yet?