Actually it isn't hyperbole because that is just the kind of thing that a lot sound like they are advocating "to make sure the player pays for taking the quality", and it is exactly that sort of thing that I'm crusading against because that is simply way too punitive.
Which, as others have pointed out, is entirely your misinterpretation. If not, please point out, with specifics, the places where GMs are advocating enemies employing fish-based weaponry or locating every-single combat in fish-processing locations as Triskavanski is stating. It is, by definition, hyperbole.
Fish and seafood are very different, particularly as the basis for an allergen in the Shadowrun universe. No point in really arguing that, particularly as a specific point...
As the OP, I also don't really care about other systems like Heroes or M&M or BSG, I'm only looking at how Shadowrun plays it and how GMs interpret some of the grey areas. I personally think NQs work as a system. When it comes down to it, I basically ask myself: "Would the designers create a system that awards up-front karma for a disadnavtage if said disadvantage is not supposed to be used against a player?" The answer seems pretty obvious to me, but then I accept that I might have to sacrifice from time to time if I want to have an advantage in another area.
Anyway, I got my answers, y'all can continue to discuss if you want.
