1) Obviously he improvised with feedback, but again he usually wasn't very sloppy... I guess I just would like examples of when you think he is sloppy, cause before I was trying to figure it out myself.
Mostly, when he extended his solos to 10+ minutes, he often lost direction and structure and resorted to 'making sounds'. I'm not necessarily saying it's a bad thing, but it sure ain't more impressive than Clapton, who could bring the listener to orgasm with a 10 minute solo.
2) Literally less than 1% of guitar enthusiasts share your view of Machine Gun.
So you've surveyed every guitar enthusiast on the planet?
I don't know how you think its boring, but it is definitely not unfocused, everything he does in that solo drives it along. It's hard for me to argue this with you because I honestly have no idea how anyone who cares about guitar (not saying you don't) can dislike that song.
3) There is a doubt. Maybe he does, but Hendrix had four years and Clapton had 40, and that has to account for something. I would also say Hendrix's peaks are higher than Clapton's.
But he shouldn't get extra points because he died early. It's like Jeff Buckley on the vocalists list...we just don't know what would've happened, had he lived.