No need to be brusque with me.  Vinay is the decision maker on this.

Overall, this seems rehash and second guess the discussions and decisions made 15 years ago when PEP 282 was accepted.  At that time, it was decided that five levels had advantages for learnability and usability, but that the levels should be extendable to cover more specialized uses:

    >>> import logging
    >>> SEMI_IMPORTANT = 35
    >>> logging.addLevelName(SEMI_IMPORTANT, 'SEMI_IMPORTANT')
    >>> logging.log(SEMI_IMPORTANT, 'request backlog getting high')
    SEMI_IMPORTANT:root:request backlog getting high

This effortless extendability let us avoid adding the whole zoo of names sometimes used in other projects (FATAL, TRACE, NOTICE, FINE, FINER, FINEST).  As far as I can tell, this module has a 15 year track record of success and was well thought-out from the outset.  So there is no reason to suddenly be so insistent that the module must change to accommodate your world view of how everyone else should prioritize their log entries.

As a teacher, project leader, and coach, one thing I really like about Vinay's design is that people seem to easily and naturally assign the correct rank order to the existing five levels.  Today, I asked some engineers where TRACE or NOTICE would fit in and they were unsure.  This indicates that adding new levels will impact usability and make users worse off.