aim said:
This is gonna have 200+ voters by the time we are done. Most of which only played ubers during their reqs journey. I hope this ban isn't one-sided on the wrong side.
I actually see this as a huge problem (too). I think what will/could likely happen is that a lot of users who have not played ubers a lot before get to vote. This is very bad. I guess you can blame that on a couple things, mainly the reqs being lax as you need only 2400 coil, no gxe limit/bottom (even something low as 70 would help) and we get an entire month to get reqs, which means you can take your time and losing lots doesnt matter too much as you have enough time to make up for it. You could say the same for other suspects, but lets take RU and OU as example here (note: I'm NOT comparing the suspected mons, just the concept behind the test itself). OU has much more difficult reqs, 2700 as opposed to 2400 and 2 weeks to complete it. RU also requires 2400 coil, but only 2 weeks to get them.
Now outside of these reqs being 'too ez', as some (including me) say there is another (more important point). This suspect requires more insight on the subject, ban or no ban megagengar is not at all related to its strengths and downfalls, in this aspect this suspect is much different from mmawile or yanmega/zoroark. Its about if gengarite is uncompetitive or not. Now to truly understand if it is or not you must know how this pokemon affects the tier and how it does so, and then form a solid opinion about what role shadow tags plays in this and if you find what this mon does troubling to the point that it could be considered uncompetitive or not. I'm sure we have all read the suspect discussion thread and saw a lot of people write paragraphs about how "broken" it was "and how it forces 50/50's, thus this is ban-worthy" and "how it can be pursuited because it needs a turn to mevo". Now, there arent a too many posts saying just this in five lines, but a a lot of posts, when you read them trough and slightly analyse them you will usually see it has on of these arguments/statements as the core of the whole post. Once again, these are irrelevant. If you want to ban it, you need to ban/not ban it based on (un)competitiveness, and on nothing else.
With all these less-experienced users getting to vote (point 1) that are informed too little about the subject and are voting based off of bad arguments, or some/a lot of them at least, (point 2). For this reason I hope that whoever will be filtering these paragraphs wont be too lax with doing so. The ideal situation for me would be: both mm2 (pro-ban) and hugen (anti-ban) filter posts (as to avoid bias), and also take into account poor reasoning/understanding showed in the suspect discussion thread (the person not getting a different stance/argumentation based on some counter-arguments (people saying his "its broken" argument isnt right")). Thats needed so you cant just summarize some meaningful posts in the suspect thread. Of course there are only so many arguments, so you cant go around blaming everyone, but when they showed poor understanding thats seems rather negative to me. If someone hasnt participated then you can only base "allowed to vote: y/n" off the paragraph I guess. When both are adamant on filtering out bad argumentation posts it should be fine, I have little trust in the results otherwise.
PS: Moved this from the the alt-confirmation thread and deleted the now irrelevant parts, as it was deleted for being out of place there, but still wanted to share it because this is how I feel.