It's an entirely reasonable stance to accept a small amount of inflation because farmers produce more gold, but be opposed to a huge amount of inflation that occurs because a new source of farming is suddenly much better than all the rest.
You argument is like saying, "You can either be opposed to taxes, or for taxes, regardless of the tax rate". Obviously that's not how it works. I can accept a 10% tax even if it hurts me, but opposed to a 100% tax.
This feels like the type of logical argument that people would never make in person because it's absurd, but that pops up on the internet because people have time to try to make these complicated statements that don't really hold up when you just snap out of it.
Also, this seems relevant:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope