Joining the senate endows you with a responsibility greater than yourself, and the people who understand that would have no problem putting in the effort necessary to balance this metagame for the community. People who complain about the time and dedication they don't have are a non-issue to me; that just means they weren't right for the job in the first place.
I don't mean to be rude, but it is a lot easier to say you think a council make the best decisions when you are one of the people on the council making the decision. Someone who is not on the council is of course more likely to disagree. Simply put, it is easy to say that you like a system in which you have a say, and it is also easy to say that you dislike a system in which you do not. Telling people to just accept it and buzz off because you think it is a good system is just annoying. If people don't like something, they have a right, and, in my opinion, a responsibility, to let people know what they think. Personally, I have said enough for myself, and I don't feel like keeping up an argument for the system of a tier that is not one of the most important to me. However, I will certainly defend the right of other people to continue to do so.
And I don't mean to be rude in this response, but I've seen what outcomes occur when you run the democratic current system and the one being proposed, and quite frankly, I'd rather put the tiering process in the hands of those most capable rather than the majority. I've been here long enough to know that the majority is easily manipulated and persuaded to follow in the steps of more well-known battlers (Jabba pretty much made Reuinclus a suspect on his own in OU). You can defend the right of other people all you want, but at the end of the day, just because you hit a threshold rating mark doesn't mean you're qualified to make the decisions on how a tier is run; I've seen dumbass logic be the reason to ban some things over the years, and it infuriates those that actually give a shit about the tier.
I like this idea, and ToF if you want the best battlers only then why didnt they just raise the ladder score you need to get? 1450 in OU was too easy, if they made it 1500 then we would likely have a more qualified voter pool and a smaller one. Implementing something like that in UU or RU could work too. You can't bs your way to 1500 in the OU ladder and im sure in UU/RU there is a point in which most of the voters are the best of the best anyways.
You're right in saying that just because you don't have a high ladder rating that your opinion isn't valid, but it's much safer, quicker, and easier to just ask for a high rating as a requirement because chances are if you have a high rating then you know your shit.
