It's an interesting thread but way too complex to my simple mind. I think of skis as damp or not damp.
This season I have been majority using a carbon ski - benefits being it is light for its size and "chuckable" and basically will do what I'm thinking of. The penalty is death rattle when you hit a field of groomer cookies or refrozen crud.
In contrast a similar sized trad construction ski I skied gave a satisfying whomp when hitting such detritis. The expense being needing to work it harder all over.
Funnily enough having skied almost all the skis from this manufacturer the only time I've thought the carbon model superior for me in the way it felt was in the one I have in carbon.
I have a pair of skis (Volant Machete Gravity 190 cm) that I would describe as damp at speeds below 45 mph, very damp. They have a lot of metal (stainless steel cap construction) and wood. However at speeds over 55 mph I would describe them as hyper-active to the point of being scary to anyone with any sense of self-preservation.
P.S. It's not everybody that can sus out the suspension, knowing what needs adjusting, the spring stiffness, the damping, what speed damping, etc..