Well, I define catchiness as a fixed thing... sort of. heh. I'll try to explain: the first melody of Hate Me!, after the intro... I'd call that catchy. But I don't like the melody. But I still consider it catchy. Black Widow's chorus is very catchy... but I like it. Opinion still has much to do with it, but most ppl consider similar things to be 'catchy'.
My point is just that many ppl, while making fun of many other styles of music (often the only thing they can attack is their "type" of catchiness), applaud their own fav bands' catchiness. It's foolish. I know we're close to getting mixed up in labels here, but I'd still say catchiness is a fairly concrete thing (despite appearing in different forms throughout all types of music). Like, I wouldn't deny that hip hop and rap is very catchy, but I don't enjoy it.
I think by default, the human brain's unconsciousness is responsive to certain arrangements... we call it catchiness. But it's up to our consciousness to sort which melodies we "like" and "dislike". It's absolutely arbitrary but still... I bet all of you have heard someone call CoB "gay" or something similar before, even tho it's undeniable talented and catchy. And I've heard undeniably talented (not in the same way as CoB, tho) rap and hip hop that I said sucked...
EDIT: Ah, oops. This has been covered but just in case, I'll make it clear since you directly said this: you say that I define the CoB songs that I liked as not catchy. Not true. This is similar to what that Finnish guy said, in a way. I love catchiness, but it is only one aspect of many. Flow, structure, solos, emotion, innovation, improvisation... many other things combine to make a solid song in my mind. It's been my observation that a clear majority of ppl only care about emotion and catchiness.
What do you think, MagSec? I hope I've explained myself. I'd like to see what that Finnish guy has to say too. I always wonder if ppl will apologize when they tell someone off for no reason.