Yeah, it's like I said earlier: T2 should've been the definitive end of the story. That doesn't mean you can't make more movies based in the Terminator world, or make a spin-off. That just means that you have a bounded sandbox you need to work within. Everything you do has to make sense within that sandbox, so theoretically, there should be no field-ready Terminator unit more advanced than the T-1000. You could theoretically pull off merging a T-800 endo with a T-1000, but you can't just keep making more and more movies like T2. That's retarded.
It's all about maintaining the integrity of the central characters, narrative, and the world that it describes. If you can't do that, then less and less people will be invested in it, because anything can change and sooner or later some new bullshit is gonna get introduced that starts to dilute or just ruin everything that came before.
There need to be rules. If you're thinking about breaking them, there'd better be a really good reason that maintains the rest of the world despite it, and the movie better be great. T2 I think does this well on both counts; iirc from the novelization, the T-1000 snuck in and sent itself back through time after Connor sent Reese back. Realizing this had happened, the Resistance sent back a reprogrammed T-800. There still might be some gaps there or rules broken that were set by T1, but I'd have to read the novelizations.
If we're going strictly by EFAP/MauLer rules, T2 sacrificed some relevant expo in exchange for a tight, shortert film, so if falls short of the rule-breaking mandate. However, it delivered a great film that resolved the time loop from the first film in a satisfactory manner, so it can be forgiven and patched up. Otherwise, it would've been a much more polarizing film, like T3, which performed better as a parody of T2 than as a sequel.