I'm not sure I understand what you guys are saying.
I'll have to admit that I have only read the crash course and not the book, but does Trimpey ever actually claim that he has "the answer"? My impression is that he does not. If RR doesn't take some formal "shape", then all it is is an idea. I quit drinking much the way AVRT describes, before discovering it as a "method". I think I would have benefited from reading about the concept of personal choice and quitting drinking. As it was, I simply made the conscious decision that I was no longer a drinker.
Redefining oneself as a "non-drinker" seems to be a minimalist version of the Big Plan. I'm not sure it matters what we call it, but if it helps to give it a name, then so be it. I just personally didn't, and don't, see a reason to make it more complicated than it is.
My impression is that AVRT has never been about a "one size fits all" approach to quitting drinking. If we've got to a call it something, I would take an opposite viewpoint and call it a "one size fits one" approach to quitting drinking.
Does it have to be so complicated when making a decision to "never drink again"? The concept is only complicated and difficult until you get used to your new identity. I think that is what the Big Plan is for -- until being a non-drinker becomes second nature, maybe it helps to set up a hypothetical barrier.
I think a general resistance to the idea of "never" doing anything again is the real root of this argument. I'm not going to guarantee anyone, including myself, that I will never ride the bus naked. It's a ridiculous and unnecessary proclamation, but makes just as much sense to me as promising I will never drink alcohol again, which would an equally ridiculous thing for me to do.
FT