Just because an individual is sterile does not mean it's not a hybrid; hybrids are by definition a cross between two or more species. They just aren't fertile hybrids and thereby can't produce F2 generations; if one does not wish to risk contamination of lines but is curious about results (appearances, genetic inheritance etc.) a sterile hybrid would be preferable. The linked thread has incorrect information from the person linked to claiming that a sterile individual is not a hybrid or that fertile hybrids mean they are the same species; neither is true IN THE SLIGHTEST and anyone with a decent taxonomic background knows this well. Our boxes don't fit nature, and never have, and the biological species concept (if they can breed they're the same) falls apart more often than it ever holds true. Example: wolves and coyotes interbreed to produce fertile offspring, but are never considered the same species. Corn snakes and king snakes can interbreed and produce fertile offspring (F2 hybrids and beyond are well known in herpetoculture), and they're unquestionably not even in the same genus let alone species. Many hybrids also do exist in nature, even outside human disturbance, in areas of overlap or environmental gradation and are an important, even essential aspect of evolution.
Personally, if it's possible I see no reason why hybrids are an inherently bad thing IF one responsibly monitors them and does not either try to pass them off as a pure species, introduce them somewhere or contaminate species lines. My experience with such however is in the realm of reptiles and botany, where the issue can be polarizing as well but far more positively received, and the results often fantastic.