A question concerning MVC (general, not web related)

All right. You are welcome. No problem with telling the detail of your question; this is a pretty much free discussion.
Generally, I consider the whole idea of BL, "business logic" quite questionable or at least fuzzy. It's a kind of an ugly consequence of the fact that the whole software development was strongly distracted from science and technology to business, often overly trivial. I am not doing any business-related software, so, should I also call part of our logic "business logic"? But, frankly, just "logic" is not much better or better defined. I would not use such notions at all, by all the reasons I tried to explain. In practice, the considerations should consider more essential matter, focused on more concrete actions described as "logic".
—SA

You are very welcome.
I really don't know what to say about the terminology, would be in great doubt if I put forward some pattern of
this kind... :-)
Yes, I think I understood your view on the role of controller and assume it's reasonable.

Here is what I think: the logic you put in the model reflects the application semantic. The controller's logic (in the sense I discussed) may or may not reflect some part of application semantic. Is it good if it does? Hardly. It's desirable that the controller code was abstracted from the application semantic, that way, it could be — just one particular aspect — more easily reused for some other applications. But it's even more desirable to prevent application semantic from spreading between model and controller (or something else). I think this is what you require, according to you "never, really never, I would give the controller a chance to be a part of my BL" view. Therefore, the application semantic should be modeled solely in the model part of the architecture and be comprehensive enough for that purpose.

Probably, in a pinch, the authors of the literature in the topic assumed that semantic is some "business" and kept using the term "business logic". I think the essence of things is the decomposition of every solution (in general sense of this word, not in the sense of VS file :-) into the parts according the the levels of abstractions. Say, you can have abstract and universal layer (from the standpoint of computing) which is semantic-agnostic, relative to the application semantic. In you mix a part of application semantic in it, it cannot be reasonable reused (but such reuse may or may not be required). The semantic-aware layers can also be further stratified, because, say, semantic may reflect application field, which should not be specific to a particular organization (say, stakeholders ordering the software). And so on... Every layer has something which can be called "logic", but the point is not to mix the part of knowledge of different degree of abstraction between them. The key point here is: where the knowledge on each subject comes from?

—SA