@Jumpman-- thanks jumpman. If it's only 2 weeks that's no biggie. By the way, as much as you hated it (and I appreciate it was a pain in the ass) I actually liked the bold voting. I'm very much in favor of smogon realizing that the subjectivity can't be avoided. I guess my only qualm being that to this day I disagree with the notion elloquent and "intelligent" (or intelligent sounding) opinion is more valuable than a plain old opinion in this process (though my votes were counted).
thanks for appreciating what i did, and I am glad that you realize that subjectivity can't be avoided in assessing a suspect's tier status (where i say suspect so it applies to things like stealth rock and species clause). this subjectivity, though, is the same reason that a "plain old opinion" is more problematic than trying to make the process based on a little more skill, be it by requiring that your post indicates you have experience or that your CRE and volatility do.
Remember, we are a competitive battling community that constantly aims to educate newer players first and foremost, and the influx of eager but inexperienced players is something to keep in mind when considering letting "just anyone" vote. The sheer and undeniable fact that there are literally more people who do not know a great deal about the nuances and intricacies of competitive pokemon than those who do is the reason votes would be skewed towards the worse. "But whatever", I neither came up with nor supported this process for this reason!
The problem with the bold voting came from the way they were judged. It was not "voting," simply because some people had their votes not counted for whatever reason. I would compare it more closely to arguing before a judge, as in the end it was one person's subjective opinion who determined whether your vote was actually counted or not. The vast difference between Tangerine's final count and Jumpman's final count should attest to the flawedness of the method.
There is no one way to define what should be uber or not - you will get as many different opinions on the matter as there are people to weigh in on it. But, using the method of voting, everyone's differing opinions have a chance to balance out and see if the majority really feels like something is worthy of the ubers tier or not.
I think this has more to do with the fact that Tangerine has stated himself that he accepted many of the "plain old opinions" referred to my ChouToshio. A reminder of what Tangerine said:
Sure, their arguments "may be weak" but I believe that if we are indeed going to "count votes", it is for the purpose of "there is no clear stance so let the majority rule", and hope the biases and poor definitions even each side out.
Doesn't fly with me for reasons I've stated. It's water under the bridge now but there is no reason to believe that biases and poor definitions will even out in a community literally with more inexperienced people than those with the experience needed to sound off on such an important issue as a Suspect's tiering.
Obviously, some people don't have the relevant experience to cast a vote. But going through the arguments one-by-one to try and determine their worth was absolutely the wrong way to do it, since in the end, all it does is just adds one more person's opinion into the mix. Since a player's skill and experience can (generally) be measured objectively via his or her shoddy record, there is no reason to use a more subjective and ultimately completely flawed system of judging votes. Someone who achieves the necessary ranking obviously has a pretty good idea of what an uber is, even if they cannot clearly and eloquently state it, and will be voting based on that.
"I agree"...I've maintained forever that I neither came up with nor supported that process, but I administered it because the majority of the decision makers though it was the best idea at the time and because I was asked to. The Suspect Test process goes a long way towards eliminating subjectivity. However, I will underline the suspicion raised by TAY: if there are actually a good number people who are going to grind up the ladders with the sole intention of voting whichever way they planned to before DX-S's turn on the Suspect Ladder, or, God forbid, before it was even ever seen in Standard play in February, without letting what they actually experience in the Test dictate how they vote, then guess what? It's going to be an even
more subjective process, with "good" but biased people with their own personal agendas determining the tiering of every Suspect we have, and we will have wasted months of time for every single Suspect we test. Don't do this, guys.
