I’m against it. It’s been too long since the time skip and I don’t have the perspective that Conqueror’s Haki is gained. I believe you either have it or you don’t.
Zoro laying his head down for Luffy during thriller bark is the reason why he isn’t a conqueror, because he was willing to give up his dream at one point For someone else’s.
Even aiming for his title, Conqueor’s Haki isn’t needed, nor has it been as versatile as the other forms of Haki.
I agree in that this is pretty black and white in regards to having it. You are either born with it or not, no middle ground or concessions. That said, I don't think laying his head down is indicative of whether he can or not have it. By now there are plenty of conqueror's haki users who have been perfectly cool about yielding to someone, for however many reasons.
1.- Silver Rayleigh was roger's VC and never took over the roger pirates after they were disbanded. Even though he probably had even the makings of a yonko.
2.- Boa hancock would bend herself backwards or any direction for that matter over luffy.
3.-Chinjao placed his children and army at luffy's disposal.
4.-Katakuri is perfectly fine as big mom's expendable and worthless pawn.
5.- Oden was subordinate to roger and whitebeard. And he pretty much folded to kaido.
6.- Ace was defeated by WB and joined his crew.
7.- Doflamingo was essentially a subordinate to kaido...
8.- Sengoku was fleet admiral but he was still subordinate to kong and the world government.
8 out of 15 confirmed haki users in the series have gladly been subordinate to others... Doflamingo is more of a stretch but quivering in fear at kaido potentially retaliating is not a good look for a conqueror if their behavior has to be universally unyielding.
It's true that technically zoro does not need conqueror's haki (though technically no one else does as the haki is barely useful) but saying that he can't be a conqueror because he is a subordinate to someone ignores how many subordinate conquerors the story has.
