The Ontological Argument - valid or debunked?

[Angrboda]

By an objectively better example of a triangle you are claiming that it's outline is a better fit for the definition of a triangle.  A triangle has an objective definition of being a figure with three sides.  This is not the case for greatness.  There is no objective definition of what constitutes greatness, so whether or not a being fully exemplifies the notion of an objectively great being is a nonsense question.  It has no sense in which it is true or false.

I am using the word "great" in the same way as in "x is greater than or equal to 3". I believe that is the proper interpretation of greatness as it relates to the argument. For any additive property the MGB has it to the greatest extent.

X is greater than 3 because both belong to an ordered set. There is no such ordered set for properties. You could just as easily be adding negatives as positives.