JabbaTheGriffin
Stormblessed
That makes just as little sense though. If a user doesn't want to vote on a Pokemon, why should their lack of a vote make it harder for a Pokemon to get banned. With what you're proposing an abstention may as well be called a vote for OU. If someone doesn't want to vote on something, their lack of a vote should not be counted towards anything. In a vote of 20 people if 10 people think a pokemon is uber, 6 think it's OU and 4 want to vote on that particular pokemon, how does it make sense to keep that Pokemon OU?Ok, fair enough...but I still don't think that abstentions should help something get banned as they did with D-N. Since banning is an extreme measure, I don't think it's unreasonable to say that the supermajority has to be of all voters explicitly voting "Uber" before banning something. I change my stance from advocating removing abstentions to just making abstentions count in the total vote tally (but not for one side or the other).
ps: agreeing with obi's proposal