When I wrote that "Radiohead doesn't feel like a noughties band, they didn't do anything significant after 2001" and that I'd still vote for Radiohead, I clearly acknowledge that they released some good stuff in the 00s, while at the same time I am obviously saying that they haven't been a very prominent or incessant band in that decade, since they (to me) got done early.
In the next post I clearly state that this (that they didn't do anything of interest after 2001) is my opinion and that I respect that others might disagree, so I have no idea why you quoted that post and felt you needed to tell me that what I wrote was my opinion.
Short and simple: I make three points about Radiohead; they've released good things in the 00s; they weren't a "dominating" band in the 00s (and to be "the best british rock band in the 00s", you should probably have had a presence that lasted longer than a couple of years - at most: and that this is my opinion.
I see I should have stated it as succinctly as in the previous paragraph, since you got so confused. My apologies, Suarez-style.
(That was Radiohead. To include Oasis in that list is like including Schmeichel in a similar list of great footballers from the 00s.)