Thanks for the reply, but it doesn't really answer my question. LOOT itself states in no uncertain terms that is not the end-all-be-all and that you always have to tweak some esp positions. If that's the case, how true are the assertions made in the PerMa suggested load order? I mean claims like "all stuff that adds items/spells goes before CCOR and after Cutting Room Floor". Because that rule seems logical, if you think about what CCOR does.
However, if I use LOOT with STEP CORE and it's associated user-created meta rules, I get item mods all over the place. But if I try to fix that with new meta rules, I get other mods at weird places in the load order due to the rules STEP already had me add. However, in contrast with the suggested load order from PerMa, I don't see the merit in several of the meta rules that STEP mandates. See my example in the previous post. There might be reasons but I haven't found any explanations for them yet. So how important are those STEP meta rules, really, and should I overwrite them to adhere to PerMa suggestions for load order?
Our meta rules are necessary. PerMa is giving basic suggestions, mostly because not everyone is using the same methodology for sorting plugins as of late. In reality, a load order can be perfectly fine with the "mods at weird places." Since LOOT has looked into PerMa from the sounds, you should be generally safe following it + our rules, except, perhaps, the STEP Patches. The only real way of knowing for sure is to look it up in TES5Edit. The example of BetterQuestObjectives and aMidianBornContentAddon is definitely a necessary rule, which I personally researched myself.