While I can understand these “meta-level” arguments for why X or Y things weren’t interrogated/got reacted to by a character, they don’t really change how the end result feels to read. Writing isn’t based on a quota system where if a character got (X) level of exposure previously the character has used up their ““points”” and the reader shouldn’t expect them to behave/react as previously. By this rationale it would be totally permissible if Usopp got absolutely nada exposure at Elbaf as long as he’d gotten a subplot of [Z] page length within [Y] chapters of Elbaf.
You can’t use meta-level parameters to calculate your way out of when it’s appropriate for characters to react in a way that reflect their previous characterization. So yeah in terms of Sanji and the Wano famine, Sanji had stuff to do in the prior arc, but there is literally no other character in the entire series with a stronger emotional link to the concept of famine in the series, and when this subject appears on the largest possible scale – Nationwide famine enforced by the villains! – this seems like a no-brainer to expect Sanji to react to. Again, I refuse to believe that if, around chapter 600 or whatever, someone had asked “hypothetically, If the crew visited an island with a countrywide famine enforced by the evil villain, do you think this would somehow be linked to Sanji?” the response would’ve been “Nah, if Luffy is angry about it we shouldn’t expect more”.
And no the fact that Sanji gets mad about food wasting when he is feeding the supposedly regime-loyalist capital, literally the only place in the nation unaffected by the famine, is not an adequate substitute; character writing isn’t making ticks on a clipboard of “We had Sanji involved in [Food related subplot]? That’s the quota met, no space for him reacting to [literal highest possible escalation of a food conflict subplot]”. For petes sake, theres more time allotted to Sanji reacting to bad Skyepan marinade than to the nationwide Wano famine, is it not possible to concede that its fair for people to find this odd? Regardless of whether or not Pageone knocked over a bowl of noodles at the capital soba stand?
These character-specific quirks and reactions are part of the bedrock of the series, of what made the characters endearing to begin with. And said traits can be iterated upon in new, fun ways to provide surprising outcomes, similarly to how Bender from Futurama can have the first dozen jokes about him being childishly callous. Oda once spent several panels to convey Zoro not being able to find his way South despite hanging out with a Southbird, including a whole precious page purely for a good joke about just how lost Zoro was, is this “wasteful” or “unneeded” or whatever? Since we’ve revisited Zoros poor sense of direction multiple times over the course of the series?
If we can get a horndog reaction from Sanji each and every time he spots someone without an Y chromosome, why can't he have more of a reaction when the subject of "starvation" appears every once in a blue moon?
And even if you find something like Luffys trait of absolutely not having when people mistreat their crewmates “repetitive” because it gets play several times in the series, it also makes him a strongly defined consistent character. It helps making Luffy feel like Luffy when you have an idea how he’d react to things, and he then delivers, as opposed to if they came across a crewmate-abusing villain and Luffy didn’t give a shit.
I mean, this chapter we get Nami having an angry reaction on Robins behalf due to York evoking the destruction of Ohara, and it’s a neat little character moment that people responded positively to and which builds on pre-established bonds and traits, showcasing the empathy and morality of the characters in a way that frames Nami as more righteous than the villainous York
But when the question is raised of of the Crew, with their history of objecting to child endangerment, unethical experimentation and robbing of free will, not having any sort reaction to the Seraphim suddenly oh no theres no time for that that isn’t necessary, that would just get in the way, we can surmise it ourselves between the lines it just isn’t possible in any way whatsoever to have included and also its not something we should care about to begin with? Come on.
No one is complaining that we get to see Luffy and Usopp excited about Elbaf again, or that we saw a humorous beat of Franky surprising Vegapunk by saying the Sunny is cola powered, but those beats are supremely redundant, cuttable, predictable, "unnecessary". Yet I fully suspect that if Luffy and Usopp had had no reaction at all to learning Elbaf was the next destination, the arguments would have been “We already know they’re excited, we Didn’t Need to see, Just No time for them to react” etc.
And this argument is just so incredibly generic and all purpose, you can slot it into any scenario, any discussion of something getting glossed over that should be a bigger deal to the characters. Until recently the all-purpose criticism dismissal was always that we should “wait and see” – wait for the Minks to get more exposure in Wano, wait for Kaidous Flashback, wait for Franky to shine at Egghead wait for Usopp to shine at Elbaf, but now the argument seems to be “we didn’t need to see that” if some element is depicted as lacking.
You could have the crew go to No Cartography, Orphans or Tangerines Allowed island, and if someone stated that it was weird that Nami had nothing to do and no real reaction to anything you could wheel out this argument; “Nami got X amount of paneltime in the preceding arc, you shouldn’t expect her to be a fixture of the No Cartography Orphans or Tangerines arc. It’s enough that Sanji was mad about Tangerines being absent. We know she likes children, we didn’t need to see it again”.
And like if you personally don’t care about seeing pre-established character traits enforced on-panel, of Luffy and Usopp excited about Elbaf again, or seeing Chopper get mad at multiple mad scientists, or about seeing Sanji take a stand against starvation or Nami against child endangerment more than “necessary”, that’s fine, but the story is explicitly engineered to get readers to care about such things, and so its fair for people to point out if their absence is felt.
If Oda will play the card of having Straw Hat characters reacting to the endangerment of children, or cloning, treating others purely as battle assets, robbing someone of free will etc then expecting actual on-panel followthrough on this regarding the seraphim is not some absurd notion, some unrealistic expectation to have. When Mr 3 meets Crocodile again at impel down he reacts in a way that reflects their prior relationship, but when the crew, with their entire backlog of personal principles and moral stances and reactions meet the seraphim people are unreasonable for expecting any sort of reaction or interrogation? Not even a tiny little bit?