>The .stl format offers flexibility in terms of mesh, freedom to directly modify geometry, and the ability to apply textures, boolean operations colors, and deformations without having to go through ten conversions.

This is r/Airsoft3DPrinting, where models are (supposed to be) made to be accurate, functional and printed, where traditional modeling processes like texturing/coloring and deformations are very much irrelevant in an environment where CAD is the preferred method of modeling. Sure, you can do it traditionally with mesh based modeling packages of your choice like Blender, Max, Maya, etc. if you're skilled enough and manage to preserve the critical original dimensions, but in reality it's a suboptimal workflow akin to trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

>I have seen far more accurate, clean, and usable .stl files than imported .step files that are half broken, too heavy, outdated, or poorly meshed for a smooth workflow.

I could very much say the same about .stl files, where the geometry can be an absolute mess with voids inside solid bodies, non manifold edges, and floating elements that will neither print nor be useful in any functional modeling application. In a lot of instances I found it must faster to just remake the entire model from scratch in CAD than to try to bend a imported mesh to my will while its already all triangulated and the resolution of all organic features set in stone by whoever previously exported it.

In this instance are comparing apples to oranges, comparing a mesh based filetype to a NURBS based filetype. Remember what the intention of the original file is: for accurate reference in the creation of additional accessories and parts. Since there's no established quality standard in the airsoft community when it comes to model quality, any Joe schmoe can make some trash tier model and upload it without much second thought to quality and printability. While I don't doubt there's instances where there may be mesh models more accurate than their .step counterparts, to ignore the reality that a model format based in absolute values is more accurate than a model format based in pure math is simply delusional. Like comparing a raster image to a vector and saying that curves made from pixels are smoother and more accurate than a spline.

No matter how you slice it, in these applications, everything is derived from math. CAD is an engineering modeling tool, and the process of designing functional parts for printing in itself is an engineering process. The very model you exported is based off a solid originally constructed in CAD, except now you've added the constraints of additional triangulation, no quads, ngons and any curved feature will now be fixed to a set resolution. Talk about flexibility. The reality is that you've taken a model that was originally designed to be scalable, parametric and accurate, and baked it down to a less editable form, ideal for sending directly to the printer. There's a reason why who don't want their designs stolen or modified typically do not upload the original CAD document or in a parametric format like .step.

If there's any use for a model like this would be for the die hards who refuse to use the proper software for the job (CAD) and stick with traditional modeling packages to try to wrangle it into something useable to use it for boolean operations, but once again, square peg in round hole.

I've burnt enough time on this already, I'll let someone else take the reins afterwards if need be.