"not banned" and "fucking disaster" are not mutually exclusive. darkrai shouldn't be here. kyurem shouldn't be here. roaring moon shouldn't be here.
All of those Pokémon are here because a significant amount wanted them to drop. (Yes they were voted down by council votes, no this does not invalidate this point. These Pokémon were still largely requested to be tested down before their votes, which is why they were voted on to begin with.) All of them are still here because, at least as of now, they haven’t received significant support for their bans, and there’s a significant chance that one or all of them will not
ever receive the support they need for a ban this gen. Moon wasn’t even
on the last survey, for example. Most people still want it around, and to act like your own opinion on their tiering is inherently more correct than people who disagree with you is super dismissive.
the only unequivocally not-bullshit mons that have dropped from ubers this entire gen are cinderace and the two deoxyses (deoxes?) and this is from a sample size of something like a dozen at this point.
Maybe this is just a difference in personal tiering philosophy here, but doesn’t the existence of three Pokémon even you agree deserved to be unbanned prove that bans need to be looked at from time-to-time? It’s not like we can’t just re-ban things like we have been doing when necessary, meanwhile we potentially gain multiple metagame additions, sometimes even healthy additions to lower tiers like Deo-D.
also, please don't falsely accuse people of revisionism. it's a real bad look for you
I’m not trying to be rude or offensive, so let me rephrase: when you say that “the majority of unbans have been a fucking disaster” without addressing the fact that a majority of the Ubers unbans have actually stayed in the tier and not gotten re-banned, it
comes off disingenuous since there was no attempt whatsoever to acknowledge the surrounding context of why your opinion might be unpopular. Obviously you can still feel this way if you feel that these Pokémon are still problems, but again, that’s just an opinion you personally hold that the wider community does not, and no one person should be able to dictate tiering policy.
if it's a bad idea half the time for one reason and a bad idea the other half of the time for a different reason, then it's just a bad idea the whole time. you're talking like it's something that's necessary or desirable in any way for the meta when that couldn't be more wrong. i don't know why this is so difficult for people to grasp. (well, i have some theories)
While this is still technically a matter of opinion, I just can’t accept the idea that any system of rules that doesn’t open itself up to the possibility of self-evaluation ever under any context is a well-designed set of rules, be that in politics or silly children’s games. If you don’t think something should be unbanned, then just make your case for why
that Pokémon shouldn’t be unbanned as opposed to just throwing out blanket opposition to the very concept of unbanning Pokémon in general. As much as it’s annoying how “we should unban Solgaleo” talk tends to derail the thread, these kind of blanket attempts to shut down conversations like these every time they come up no matter the context, situation, speaker, or argument ALSO derail the thread with, in at least my personal opinion, unnecessary vitriol.
