This is a frustrating discussion to have at a gnr fansite.  All the members of the band are so overrated (which is to be expected).  Original gnr was and still is my favorite band.  That said, I can still look at it objectively enough to not rate Axl as the best frontman or Slash as the best guitarist.  The truth is, they weren't and they still aren't.

How can you "forget resumes and everything else" when comparing people?  That IS the basis for making a comparison.  You cannot say "forget that he hasn't done anything productive in 10 years, Axl is still a great songwriter" or "Libertad is a good album but not great.  Slash isn't as good as he was with gnr, but he's still the best."  Maybe Axl WAS a great songwirter (debateable) or maybe Slash WAS an all time great (again, debateable).  The sad truth is that neither of them have accomplished enough to be considered an all time great and neither of them has accomplished as much without the other as they did together.  But as huge fans of the band, we make them out to be something they aren't.

It isn't my opinion that The Beatles put on high energy live shows and that's how they made a name for themselves.  That's a fact.  Lennon and McCartney were great songwriters, but many of their early hits were cover songs that they took to a new level with their style (not unlike Original gnr).  Had Axl been able to sustain his early level of production, could he have been an all time great?  Yes.  Is he one of the best frontmen ever?  Yes.  But he isn't top 5, he isn't top 10.  That isn't something to be ashamed of, it's something to be proud of.  To have accomplished as little as Axl has and to even be in the conversation is a huge compliment to the guy.