First off, I do want to say that I personally dislike the idea of tiering megas separately, and that I agree with bughouse that this very much seems like a case of bias throwing logic out in order to get a desired short term result without care for the long term.
Alright I'm gonna address this point yet again, bughouse took a portion of a post I made on the last page (found
here), in which I used the current ORAS RU meta game to make a tangential point about how more base formes dropping does not equate to more Pokemon needing to be banned (to counter act the Char-Y example). And insinuated that my entire reasoning for voting the way I did came from that one tangential point (it didn't). In the same post, if you could do me the favor of reading the first paragraph, I clearly demonstrate that all 3 options are the logical outcomes of separate axiomatic starting points, and that its really a matter of opinion at that point. I find it pretty annoying that anyone would insinuate my reasoning for this was short sited when if they had actually read that post (or any of my posts previous to that one) they would realize that I put a lot of thought about the long term into this decision as well (not that you were talking about me specifically, but its still pretty annoying).
As I've already stated, yes I'm biased, I think lower tiers getting more Pokemon is pretty fucking sweet (and I will think that in every subsequent generation as well!), that's true, but I, as a TL was asked for my opinion, and I gave it. It seems ridiculous to me that people keep stating bias is a negative when it comes to a vote on preferences, especially when they are equally biased coming from a different starting point. For example, your bias is that you are used to the current system and think it works well, you are biased towards the status quo (as are Sam and Oglemi for example), as exemplified below.
Rather, I just think there has not been any real convincing reason given to do so, using the logic that we use for our tiering system.
At this point bias is just a buzz word like uncompetitive was before we attempted to define it, except its extremely hypocritical because we are all entering this philosophical discussion, with no objectively correct outcome, with biases (and there is nothing wrong with that!).
I also just want to point out that the following comparison is flawed (I actually posted about this somewhere on the first or second page but too lazy to dig):
I mean, clearly, while a Life Orb and a Choice Band set of the same Pokemon function differently, they generally will be used to take on similar Pokemon, and if one item didn't exist, the other would see more usage on that same Pokemon.
If you Knock Off/Trick/Thief a CB or LO Scizor, its still a Scizor, if you Knock Off Mega Scizor its not a Scizor, there is also the whole BST changing thing which has been covered extensively, which applies to 0 other items. Mega Stones and Mega Evolution are a brand new mechanic introduced in this generation and as such is worthy of this type of discussion, other items have never been anything like this and are not worthy of this type of discussion.
EDIT: For clarification, I am not specifically saying that Gyarados or Alakazam should not drop. Just that the current system does not provide good enough justification for such an occurrence.
The current system doesn't justify them dropping correct, but following the logical outcomes of the proposed system, they would, I don't see the point of this.
I've pretty much said all I have to say on this subject, and based on what I've read most people have, the only thing left is to reach a decision, which if its up to the TL vote, a decision has already been reached, and this thread is pretty useless. If it isn't up to a TL vote, then whoever is responsible for deciding should do so, cause this thread has dragged on for long enough.
