No I’m saying the if “being regular is a perfect-generating property of a triangle” then “it is necessary that there are regular triangles” means that “there is a thing that exhibits the property of perfect-essential necessity.” If you think it is logically necessary that triangles exist (or something that has the property of being a regular 3-sided shape), then perfect-essential necessity can be called perfect without the contradiction you point out.
No I’m saying the if “being regular is a perfect-generating property of a triangle” then “it is necessary that there are regular triangles” means that “there is a thing that exhibits the property of perfect-essential necessity.” If you think it is logically necessary that triangles exist (or something that has the property of being a regular 3-sided shape), then perfect-essential necessity can be called perfect without the contradiction you point out.