Very interesting comments thus far, but I do find inconsistencies in the"criticism", on the one hand is RBOTM about originality or something else?
Perhaps the something else is subjectivity, clearly and this is not a negative critique, but surely the vote is largely subjective, I take the point about no pedals, saddle orientation, stem length, lever position (but stem length and lever position is about ergonomics and not looks - well in my case it is).
If one gets a bespoke bike built, there are a number of things that no builder would accept to do. Most of these are related to how a bike is set up. It is on this basis that I say that certain set-ups are not "proper" from a custom bike point of view. If, as is the case here, you are largely dealing with bikes that are not custom made for the present owner, you WILL find people needing to make do to get the correct riding position with odd stem heights and lengths or odd positioning of the brake levers or other such elements. This does not mean that it becomes proper. Likewise for saddle orientation, speak to any saddle maker anywhere in the world and you will not find any that recommends anything other than a level saddle. They are aware that certain people will not be able to achieve a perfect level setting because of limitations of the saddle fixation (seatpin or clamp or whatever). Therefore if you are "showing off" your bike for public viewing, it only makes sense that you set the bike up in a way that a framebuilder or saddle-maker would expect them to be set up and would be happy to see them displayed. (BTW, your Raleigh has what I feel to be great set-up.)
And how many here (or on any RBOTM) are"new"builds, one comment mentions about building up NOS frames etc. And how many bikes are older than their owners?
For my part, and my entry, we've been together since new and the bike, apart from its new spokes has not changed since it was rebuilt BITD with the then newly launched Shimano 600 groupset.
I have a few bikes that I have owned for over 30 years, however they tend to be special application bikes that are not regularly used. All the bikes that I have owned long-term that have seen regular use have seen so many miles that there has been a need for large scale replacement of parts. This generally means that the parts were replaced with the best replacement parts that my pocket could afford at the time and that were current at the time of replacement. This usually meant an upgrade over the original components. In a few cases, as the bikes reach old age, when faced with the need to replace used parts, I have returned them to how they were originally assembled. Others have been upgraded with the newest and finest. The way I go on each particular bike is largely dependent on my pocketbook and the particular bike. If it is a noteworthy bike that is particularly relevant to its period of creation, I will usually return it to its original condition, if it is a rather common bike with no provenance or particularly relevant build characteristics, I will generally go the route of the best modern components that I can justify from an economic point of view.
Very difficult to argue against subjectivity, my own preferences are for"British", having owned and had stolen a Bianchi BITD, Italian machines always look pretty, but to me a default choice based on"consensus"- like buying a BMW car (and I'm with Clarkson on that).
For me, I'll sit upon the fence as they are all very nice. If pushed then I prefer the one built by the TdF mechanic!
I look forward to"competing"again.
Consensus is achieved when a feature/event or in the case, a bicycle type, has been shown to represent an idea for a large number of people. I don't believe you can apply the word consensus to what pushes people to buy something coming from a country, there are simply too many differences on offer in teh various countries. Consensus could push people to buy from a relatively large producer like Colnago over what is arguably a better product from a smaller less-known builder like Somec. Consensus could push people to eschew perfectly good products like your Raleigh for flashier more exotic brands. I would also like to know what you define as being "British". When I look at your Raleigh, I do not see anything British whatsoever but rather a standardized world bike.
I too like the idea of a framebuilder also having some actual race experience as a mechanic, but I often find that years of experience with a spanner do not help at all with building a frame well, something that you only achieve after years and years.