-
Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
A URC members thoughts on the Metaknight Ban
- Thread starter mikeHAZE
- Start date
mikeHAZE
Smash Legend
No, i'm on a committee that voted to ban mk 14-0-1.
Let's put it another way: MikeHaze you are on a committee where not a single member voted "NO" when the question of "Should MK be banned" was posed.
Ripple
ᗣᗣᗣᗣ ᗧ·····•·····
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2006
- Messages
- 9,632
if you're anti ban. why did you abstain?
mikeHAZE
Smash Legend
i abstained?
AlphaZealot is in a committee where not a single member mains metaknight. This committee voted to ban metaknight 14-0-1.
I haven't said which way you voted MikeHaze, but what the public does know is that no one voted against the ban - including yourself.
That might be something you should address considering your warpath against the ban since the news was released. Though I think there is likely an alternative motive that I won't even bother talking about in public.
That might be something you should address considering your warpath against the ban since the news was released. Though I think there is likely an alternative motive that I won't even bother talking about in public.
mikeHAZE
Smash Legend
Cassio
Smash Master
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2011
- Messages
- 3,185
lol, AZ youre making no sense. There was 14 yes votes, an abstentian and some no votes. Voting no isnt always the most powerful statement you can make against the ban, and would definitely be true in this case. It just sounds like youre upset and saying non-sensical things with the way your posts are worded
Player-1
Smash Legend
There were no "no votes" it was 14-0-1. 14 yes, 0 no, 1 consciously abstaining. 2 abstaining due to inactivity.
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2009
- Messages
- 11,843
lol, you don't know what you're talking about.
There was 14 yes votes, and the others (I think 3) were inactive therefore didn't vote. Stop trying.
Also, the one who abstained was obviously timmy or tommy or whatever his name is. Something like that.
Player-1
Smash Legend
he's asking why you didn't choose to vote no when you are obviously against the ban.
Probably cause he doesn't wanna be "That Guy" Since he'd be the only one who voted No.
I'll make sure to remind myself of the strong statements members of congress make when they vote "present".
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2009
- Messages
- 11,843
"Voting no" is pretty clear.
How about, "Not voting?" next time. Or something more ambiguous like "not agreeing" just to cover your bases.
Player-1
Smash Legend
Are your names MikeHaze? No? Okay, well that's who the question was directed at, let him answer for himself and stop making assumptions up.
deepseadiva
Bodybuilding Magical Girl
Man, this got political.
How about this:
I'll make sure to remind myself how of the strong statements members of [insert any body making decisions for anything] are when they vote "present".
I'll make sure to remind myself how of the strong statements members of [insert any body making decisions for anything] are when they vote "present".
mikeHAZE
Smash Legend
i chose to not vote?
Player-1
Smash Legend
you chose to not vote no.
And in a way tournament players get to vote who URC members are since only respected TOs are allowed in. If you're getting an average of 6 players every tournament then you probably wouldn't be admitted in the URC. If a TO is bad then you probably wouldn't be going to their tournaments and thus wouldn't get in the URC.
And in a way tournament players get to vote who URC members are since only respected TOs are allowed in. If you're getting an average of 6 players every tournament then you probably wouldn't be admitted in the URC. If a TO is bad then you probably wouldn't be going to their tournaments and thus wouldn't get in the URC.
So MikeHaze, why don't you tell everyone which it is:MikeHaze said:
Did you
A) Vote 'abstain'
B) Vote 'yes' (for the ban)
C) Didn't vote because you didn't even see the poll
If you want to keep putting all these videos out you might as well be honest with people and tell them how you really stepped up for your beliefs when the lifeblood of a character was on the line. Except...you can't since not a single person voted "no".
Cassio
Smash Master
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2011
- Messages
- 3,185
Kudos to ripple for explaining it.
Seeing 14-0 on a vote sends a stronger statement about the level of input and credibility in the URC than X - 1. The fact that its referenced by both sides is evidence of that.
When Texas attempted to force a mid-census district change, several members of the state house attempted to flee the state rather then have their vote forced. Even if it didnt work out in the end it still made a stronger statement than if theyd just voted no.
Seeing 14-0 on a vote sends a stronger statement about the level of input and credibility in the URC than X - 1. The fact that its referenced by both sides is evidence of that.
Well then consider it a logical possibility in leiu of an answer.
Player-1
Smash Legend
I don't care about logical possibilities when I can just ask Mike who is right here in this thread...that's just borderline spam at that point.
Funny how you're caring about spam despite doing that in the previous Page.
Player-1
Smash Legend
whoever I said I cared about it? I'm just pointing out that it is.
Mew2King
King of the Mews
Speaking of the 14-0 (even though they were all non MK mains regardless of what Mav says), I have something interesting I have to say. I have talked with Today and Yink on their facebook accounts, and they have informed me that Today wanted MK to be legal (but voted pro ban or didn't vote; I haven't yet spoken to her yet about this) BUT I talked to Yink as well, and she said that she doesn't think MK should be banned anymore and then she resigned from URC. In fact, I will quote what Yink said to me in a PM a few days ago when I talked with her.
Chloe
I think I was just so overpressured
I doubt she was the only one that felt this way
Chloe
I think I was just so overpressured
I doubt she was the only one that felt this way
Cassio
Smash Master
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2011
- Messages
- 3,185
It wasnt just for you.
It appears Mike prefers to maintain his silence on this matter just like many other members of the URC. And honestly it wouldnt be an issue if the URC were more transparent.
Not sure if youre just trying to pressure an answer or honestly dont know, but this i just sillyness, lol. If you honestly dont see why someone wouldnt vote no when theyre against something then thats something you should learn about outside smashboards through review as opposed to forcing an answer out of Mike.Alpha Zealot said:
It appears Mike prefers to maintain his silence on this matter just like many other members of the URC. And honestly it wouldnt be an issue if the URC were more transparent.
Mew2King
King of the Mews
Really, because, I am not 100% sure of this, but I am PRETTY SURE (do not quote me on this because this is the only one I am not fully sure on) timmy and t0mmy do not think he should be banned either. And it is apparent that Mikehaze does not. So that's 4 players actually (even though none of these main MK).
Player-1
Smash Legend
We're not forcing or pressuring Mike to do anything, we just asked a question.
edit: t0mmy isn't in the URC.
Mew2King
King of the Mews
Yeah you're right, it's still a super majority in a very biased committee. Thought I should clear that up though.
Player-1
Smash Legend
you can't really call us bias without saying the same about yourself because none of us main MK and most of us chose to vote to ban him when you main mk and don't want him banned.