No, you're missing the point. I'm not saying software quality is relative, I'm saying that most current debate on what people think is quality software, is subjective nonsense.

I've also never claimed that "you can't question the quality of AI output because quality of software is [partly] subjective". I'm not sure how you got there. I am simply saying that "quality" is an ill defined term and this is why we might see so much divergence when discussing AI code "quality".

You can absolutely evaluate code quality objectively, e.g performance, bugs, crashes.