The 2/3rds Majority - An Appeal to Subjective Ruling

[AgentJGV]

SuSa i get the feeling you think that every TO is a complete dumb@$$. like. at most tournies people know what smashers expect and wont do something ridiculous like legalize rumble falls. Otherwise theyd never get people to come to their tournies.

 

[SuSa]

What I am saying, is that even though Luigi's Mansion is legal. Even though Pictochat is legal, even though Rainbow Cruise is legal.

I still see people banning those stages at tournaments. With no real justification.

Rumble Falls is actually bannable for being degenerate to gameplay. The issue with most TO's (and this entire community) is they can't even see the line between "polar" and "degenerate".

Want to know why "those stages are gay"?

It's because you suck on them. Sorry, that's how it is. Go play on RC more if you think it's a gay stage. Not once has it ****ed me over that it wasn't 100%, completely and utterly, my fault.

 

[Ripple]

at most tournies people know what smashers expect .

and that's the problem. people have been conditioned to believe a double standard is fine when its not. they simply accept the rules and play. most don't even realize they are playing like that

 

[SuSa]

If the BBR banned MK. How many regions would follow?

Flip-side of the coin.

If the BBR kept Pictochat legal. How many regions are following? Like... 2?

 

[AgentJGV]

Ah. ok yeah that wasnt what i was getting from you lol. yeah i dont understand why someone would ban that. I think just many people want the straight like FD fox only (or MK only in this case) and what they dont realize is that those legal stages like rainbow cruise are actually a crucial part of the game.

EDIT: yeah im starting to see that double standard. I haven't been active for like a year and im not liking what i see D:

 

[napZzz]

and that's the problem. people have been conditioned to believe a double standard is fine when its not. they simply accept the rules and play. most don't even realize they are playing like that

who's to say my opinion is wrong and yours is right? give the people what they want, you aren't going to convince the masses you're right, and even if they do chances are they still wont want to use the stages and wont use them anyways

 

[AgentJGV]

i think we need to stand back and ask ourselves what exactly are we trying to be right about?

...meaning im kinda confused myself

 

[Ripple]

who's to say my opinion is wrong and yours is right? give the people what they want, you aren't going to convince the masses you're right, and even if they do chances are they still wont want to use the stages and wont use them anyways

my opinion is "right" in the sense that it doesn't have a double standard. or doesn't cater to popular demand that goes against criteria

and no, don't give the people what they want. wasn't this explained by the entire sarcastic thread your posting in?

I don't need to convince the masses, I need to convince the BBR, which btw, knowing some of them and how they argue.....will be much harder

 

[AgentJGV]

I don't need to convince the masses, I need to convince the BBR, which btw, knowing some of them and how they argue.....will be much harder

but dont the BBR make decisions for us, mass of smashers? A community vote is still good to help convince them.

 

[napZzz]

theres the problem ripple, people might change and admit you're right compared to themselves prior (hypothetically speaking), but its not going to mean they'll want to do it still

the BBR cant enforce anything anymore, it never was official in the first place because TO's can still run whatever ruleset they please, but they had the rulesets that were fair and appealing to a majority of the players, and thats why we stuck with what they originally had for so long.

But lately, things have been changing, and for the better or worse however you view it the bbr has lost anything it used to have because of how unappealing they are to the masses now. Depending on what you enforce, and IF you manage to enforce on the bbr, if they release another ruleset along the lines of whatever they have now or "worse" being adding in the janky stages and such (a whole nother discussion) THE MASS STILL WONT ACCEPT IT

the 2/3rds rule is just an eye opener to this, push all you want, but you'll never convince the masses to go your way to this extent

EDIT: Not trying to pick on JUST the stages, but other new rulesets as well

 

[Ripple]

theres the problem ripple, people might change and admit you're right compared to themselves prior (hypothetically speaking), but its not going to mean they'll want to do it still

personal bias. that should be there.

the BBR cant enforce anything anymore, it never was official in the first place because TO's can still run whatever ruleset they please, but they had the rulesets that were fair and appealing to a majority of the players, and thats why we stuck with what they originally had for so long.

they can! and easily too. I have personally ( along with others such as sua) have given suggestions on what to do. they won't do it though.

But lately, things have been changing, and for the better or worse however you view it the bbr has lost anything it used to have because of how unappealing they are to the masses now. Depending on what you enforce, and IF you manage to enforce on the bbr, if they release another ruleset along the lines of whatever they have now or "worse" being adding in the janky stages and such (a whole nother discussion) THE MASS STILL WONT ACCEPT IT

I don't agree. people DO listen to the BBR. they don't even realize it

 

[napZzz]

people=/=masses

theres a reason their most recent ruleset was deemed "suggested"

 

[Ripple]

theres a reason their most recent ruleset was deemed "suggested"

which is the entire problem. do you agree or not?

 

[SuSa]

The issue is that even TO's in the BBR don't use the BBR's ruleset. (AFAIK)

Can we honestly be expected to follow suit? lol

 

[napZzz]

what a circle this argument goes in :L

 

[Ripple]

what a circle this argument goes in :L

not really, we just get into a new problem every time we bring something else up. props to susa because in his arguments he has to assume current rules and not anything of what he advocates. (sometimes) otherwise he'll end up advocating like 3 things at once and it'll seem too drastic for some people

 

[SuSa]

I always assume current rules, and I advocate logic.

Just because I present it, argue it to death, and seem like I support it.
Doesn't mean I do.

See:
My conservative ruleset

I think it's garbage. It's logically sound. But garbage.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

please tell me this was a joke, please please please

i'm not even trying to flame/be disrespectful

It was sarcasm, meant to illustrate just how ridiculously stupid the idea of letting the community choose is. Putting the rules of the game entirely or regarding anything beyond purely subjective value calls (stocks, time, that kind of thing... and even those are debatably quantifiable and objective ) in the hands of the (infamously scrubby!!!) community is a really bad idea! This thread illustrates very nicely one of the points I've been trying to make for quite a long time-if you leave it up to the community, **** is going to be ****ed up.

And I support banning IC infinites, Snake's utilt, and falco's CG. You wanna know why? Because when those are banned, I have a better chance of winning tournaments. 3 of the matchups I have the most trouble with just got MILES easier. In the case of the ICs matchup, it literally want from "gayest **** on the planet" to "I'm not afraid of you". It makes it easier for me to win games and tournaments. This is the player bias I keep rattling on and on about-tournament players will almost always mold the ruleset so that they are more likely to win. I mean, that's what we want, to win. It's only to be assumed, therefore, that if we have a part of the ruleset which is not deduced objectively, it will be severely biased; tainted by players who want to win more.

 

[AgentJGV]

And I support banning IC infinites, Snake's utilt, and falco's CG. You wanna know why? Because when those are banned, I have a better chance of winning tournaments. 3 of the matchups I have the most trouble with just got MILES easier. In the case of the ICs matchup, it literally want from "gayest **** on the planet" to "I'm not afraid of you". It makes it easier for me to win games and tournaments. This is the player bias I keep rattling on and on about-tournament players will almost always mold the ruleset so that they are more likely to win. I mean, that's what we want, to win. It's only to be assumed, therefore, that if we have a part of the ruleset which is not deduced objectively, it will be severely biased; tainted by players who want to win more.

so what about the rest of the community that can think objectively and not hold a bias? Are you claiming everyone on SWF isn't concerned with the greater good of the game? If you cast a poll right now on what people wanted banned, I doubt that everyone would ban something as ridiculous as Snakes Utilt. (Least I hope im not give the community too much credit.)

Basically whos to say subjectivity cant be fair to all? There will obviously be little bias but if the entire community shares that bias, then who cares?

 

[Sage JoWii]

People have to register to vote, not just be born in the country.

People have to go to tournaments, not just be registered to SWF.

>_> Yesh? Seems like a fair way to eliminate non-affected opinions (read: People who don't go to tournaments).

I swear Data & Ruleset is a troll's paradise~ :D

 

[John12346]

The issue is that we don't have a way to rig a poll to exclude those who do not go to tournaments.

 

[Veel]

The issue is that we don't have a way to rig a poll to exclude those who do not go to tournaments.

You could take the polls at tournaments?

 

[John12346]

...that... would actually work.

But of course, we'd need some kind of grand plan to pull it off. Mobilize people in different regions.

Before all that, we actually need to confirm whether or not the BBR will support this and what kind of questions we're gonna shoot at the opponents. We'd also need a cutoff for majority percentage, which may vary between question.

It's doable, but we'll need a lot of support.

 

[Sage JoWii]

Lawl. SWF is not a country. BBR is not the government. SWF does not need a government.

If you think you need BBR approval then you're dumb.

If you managed to get it up and running and put it up as a 2/3 Majority Ruleset some TOs are gonna try it and some may like it and some may etc., etc., etc.

Sure, we all know Dr. Pepper is the ****. But it's not a standard. People still manage to drink Dr.Pibb, and all those other Dr.Pepper rip offs. Do they know it's a generic brand? Yes, and they still switch to it.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Guys... Haven't we kinda shown that this is a ****ty idea??? Why are we debating as to how it would be possible?

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

A ton of people in this thread are missing the point of the BBR Suggested Rule Set as is, which is to give TOs a starting point for regulating their tournaments. It is a guide, and nothing more. It is true that most TOs don't use the whole set, but they do use parts.

TOs refusing to use the out-of-the-box BBR set is not a failure of the system, it essentially is the system if there even is one.