Returning to the original thread.........
It is interesting to consider the sense in which the rudder should work in the context of aileron-rudder co-ordination (let us ignore aircraft where you never use the rudder in the air).
In the case of an aircraft with adverse aileron yaw, you apply left pedal with left aileron and vice versa, and most pilots will agree that this feels natural. If you have an aircraft that exhibits proverse yaw (it does occur in some aircraft that use spoilers for roll control), you apply right rudder with left lateral control, and for most pilots this feels very unnatural.
If we now consider a crosswind landing using the "crab and kick-off drift" technique, you generally need left aileron to hold wings level when using right rudder (i.e. with the wind from the left) and again most pilots find this co-ordination natural. Note that if an aircraft possesses lateral static instability (anhedral effect) then you would need rudder and aileron inputs in the same sense, which feels very unnatural.
So, the "natural" sense for aileron-rudder co-ordination varies according to the manoeuvre being flown. Basically, it is all down to a conditioned response, or what we have become used to as the norm. There is really no right or wrong. But thank goodness that we have standardised on one system for the sense of operation of cockpit controls (except for the nosewheel steering on weightshift microlights!).
My comments above on what most pilots (in fact all with whom I have flown) consider as the natural sense is not just hypothesis but is based on many hours of instructing in variable stability aircraft where such flying qualities can be evaluated.
I have heard an apocryphal tale that one of Messrs. Rolls or Royce once made a £1000 bet that he could drive a car 1000 miles with the steering wheel working in the "wrong" sense. Allegedly, he won the bet, jumped into his own car and slammed it into a wall! Can anyone confirm this?