But I showed that no transformation of it fixes the problems or produces the behavior we want.

No, you only tried two: linearity, and a bound that's way too low.

It's not a strawman! I know there are multiple ways of deriving EU. If you derive it a different way, that's fine. It doesn't affect any of my arguments whatsoever.

You picked a possible defense of EU maximization that no one ever uses to defend EU maximization, because it is stupid and therefore easy for you to criticize. That's what a strawman is. You use your argument against this strawman to criticize EU maximization without addressing the real motivations behind it, so it absolutely does affect your arguments.