I think there's a difference between meta-drama and discussion of improving the algorithm itself to avoid meta-drama.
I'd actually honestly like to hear your reply on the proposals for flag rule changes. I think they would work, and would improve the discussion quality. We'd get more "out of the box" stuff - far left or right, but also just more out there ideas.
Finally - you spend a ton of time on the meta stuff. I read over a few pages there. You say often you don't have time for it. Perhaps it's time to try making some changes that would reduce the burden? And not ones that further lock it down, but instead add some transparency?
You guys already have vote brigading rules, flag brigading seems natural. Adding cost will improve the quality. Making vouches more precious would improve the quality.
Perhaps add a meta column to the topbar and direct/move all meta discussions there? I know your reply will be "this will only further it" but I doubt it, they could then avoid the home page altogether.
Only trying to help here, but I think you're now so meta-tired you've forgotten that meta discussion can be constructive and there's perhaps really simple changes that would reduce a good chunk of these complains.
Final note - seems like a lot of the complaints are all going the same direction. Maybe they're valid and not just drama.
Edit: let me reframe it in a way that may be helpful: if you could reply to every meta thread with a single link to a static page on HN, a small write up that included a changelog of the latest rule changes you've implemented, a clear policy enumerated, and a link to a "meta" area where you'd automatically move comments/threads, you'd save yourself a ton of time going forward, and I think you'd gain a ton of positive goodwill on the site. You'd conquer the meme thats been building for years as well.