A URC members thoughts on the Metaknight Ban

[_Yes!_]

I for one... enjoyed this video! y u all mad?

I'm not sure what Mike expected the reactions of the URC would be watching this video, in fact my largest qualm is that the video was slightly off sync with the audio which frustrated me lol.

Even though I'm not mad (though I'm salty you caught me on one of my worst PR rankings yet, couldn't have been a few months ago when I was second <_< ), I do have A LOT of comments on it. But still, I've done things very similar to what Mike is now, being a dissenting voice of a group while being in it. Sometimes it takes someone part of a group to know the true flaws of it, and I appreciate Mike using only public information which 1) doesn't leak anything despite being discontent with the URC, and 2) shows that he did research, especially with posting the links of threads in the video.

The biggest point you are making here is that you feel the members of the URC are not qualified to be making decisions like this while a group like the BBR is. I want to start off with your comedy relief section of the video (which I found funny, though lame that I wasn't mentioned >_> ).

West Coast players had a tough time naming the 17 members of the URC. Some of them got a few, which actually isn't a terrible percent. However the fact is that, the URC is largely based out of SWF, and West Coast's smash presence is somewhat lacking on SWF. I would love for them to be more involved, not that I'm trying to download AiB, but basically everywhere else in North America is represented fine on SWF. You can't blame some people from not knowing most of an group that is based out of SWF, though perhaps if anything this is a wake up call to have more of a AiB presence.

However, I wonder how the results would be if you asked them how many members of the BBR could they name? If someone can nail like 4 names out of 17 for the URC, that's hitting 23% of it. Do you know how many members are in the BBR? Over 96. The current list I can find has 96 members listed, though I know there are that haven't been updated on the list. This is technically public information as you can go through every member on SWF and see what groups they are in. Those same people are going to have to name around 23 members to hit the same % of what they guessed in the URC. Surely though you can just throw out names of top players and hope they are in the BBR when naming them. Though some food for thought... ADHD, Mew2King, Tyrant, Fatal, Atomsk, and more are not currently in the BBR. Though some of them may have been at one point or another, they have either left (because of their discontent with the BBR) or were removed at one point or other. However despite not being in it, it means they wouldn't have been a part of a Meta Knight discussion if held now, which is what you seem to have wanted.

The Meta Knight issue we are tackling here largely is a part of the North American scene, encompassing US and Canada. Yes international discussion can help, but discussing how North America can be different on the MK issue over South America, Europe, and Japan is an entirely different debate. Did you know that 16 members of the BBR are not from North America? Do you think that this could effect a Meta Knight decision made for the North America? It certainly would. I dare your lackeys to name 23% of the BBR members from outside of North America lol.

Of the 17 URC members, 7 of us are from the BBR as well. In looking at this, I'm actually shocked that you aren't one of those members Mike, and that you're advocating for a group like the BBR to make the decision. For those of us not in the BBR, we have members that are also parts of other groups on SWF that can be just as important, such as Smash Researchers. I believe 4 of the URC members are also Smash Researchers, 2 of which are also in the BBR. That leaves 9 people of the 17 who are also in other groups, who you could call multi-talented and important in more than one aspect. The URC is a group of Tournament Organizers, and it's hard to say that none of us in there aren't actually organizers. However, that doesn't mean all of the groups can not work together on Smashboards. The BBR has called for information from the Smash Lab before. Prior to the Meta Knight debate in the URC, the BBR held a series of discussions on Meta Knight between all of their members. Transcripts (summarized version, etc) of said discussions (by members who took part in it that approved of it, which was nearly 100%) were provided to the URC to help aid us in deciding the outcome of the Meta Knight issue. We have also taken look at everything the BBR has done in the past concerning Meta Knight, so to mostly imply that the BBR had no hand in this is basically... wrong.

We don't accept anyone quite as easily as you say. The only true stipulations to being a URC are that you need to use the Unity Ruleset, and that you are an active tournament hosts with upcoming events on the horizon. We have a soft cap of members we don't exceed to try to keep discussion organized and civil, and to help balance out regional representation. No, we do not look for character representation, so excuse us if no one in the URC mains Meta Knight. That isn't to say that no Meta Knight mains had their hand to discuss the topic, because we paid very close attention to the Unity Discussion Topic, other topics in general, and the polls held on AiB and SWF, which everyone had access to, regardless of who you mained. If getting into the URC was as easy as it seems, then I suppose we should have never declined anyone right? Because we have, and none of them were Meta Knight mains to my knowledge.

When the URC first started, I was very discontent with it's member list sort of like how you are now, but I eventually came around. I figured that while I didn't feel the BBR was the right governing body for a ruleset, I felt that there are people qualified to help make ruleset decisions that aren't necessarily TOs. But then I eventually realized something... When a TO hosts an event, they need to decide on the ruleset. Whether they use a ruleset already made or create their own, they give a flat out YES or NO answer to every single rule. They are deciding the fate of their ruleset and tournament. When a tournament organizer becomes successful through huge events or successful long going series, they are doing something right. That is what the member list of the URC is comprised of. Successful tournament hosts with an edge to regional representation. Regional representation is important in that, we all know tournaments in each region aren't the same. Just as a while ago Midwest players were adamant about stages such as Port Town and Green Greens being legal, but you better not DARE suggest those stages in Atlantic North. Having representation from various regions and communities is important so everyone comes together on an equal balance (aka UNITY), and who better than a successful tournament organizer from there to be their representation? The tournament organizer's forte is not frame data or tournament results, it's listening to the community and knowing what is best to do. Afterall, they want to attract the largest number of entrants to their tourney right? If they need help from masters of other aspects of the Brawl community, they are free to ask, and have. This applies to all groups, just as the BBR has asked the Smash Lab for help, despite being the most appropriate group of the best and well known smashers according to you.

And so when all is said and done, after two recent public polls that equate to roughly a 75/25 split on pro/anti ban, 3 years of endless discussion from the public where the topic would be brought up mere months after stopping if it ended up in anti ban, MK banned tournaments catching on in every single region, and a public initiative to track many statistics and data (that most of us would agree have overall been on the anti ban side of things) - it's not hard to see this inevitably coming, and the representations for all communities coming together to do this (in such a largely positive manner with 14/17 Yes votes).


WELP I spent a lot more time than I had planned to on making that post lol.

I agree with all that I read in this post.

 

[CT Chia]

And yet... I just realized I forgot to touch on a subject I meant to on that post <_<

Hmmm... wondering if I should edit it in. I'll likely wait.

 

[_Yes!_]

I for one... enjoyed this video! y u all mad?

I'm not sure what Mike expected the reactions of the URC would be watching this video, in fact my largest qualm is that the video was slightly off sync with the audio which frustrated me lol.

Even though I'm not mad (though I'm salty you caught me on one of my worst PR rankings yet, couldn't have been a few months ago when I was second <_< ), I do have A LOT of comments on it. But still, I've done things very similar to what Mike is now, being a dissenting voice of a group while being in it. Sometimes it takes someone part of a group to know the true flaws of it, and I appreciate Mike using only public information which 1) doesn't leak anything despite being discontent with the URC, and 2) shows that he did research, especially with posting the links of threads in the video.

The biggest point you are making here is that you feel the members of the URC are not qualified to be making decisions like this while a group like the BBR is. I want to start off with your comedy relief section of the video (which I found funny, though lame that I wasn't mentioned >_> ).

West Coast players had a tough time naming the 17 members of the URC. Some of them got a few, which actually isn't a terrible percent. However the fact is that, the URC is largely based out of SWF, and West Coast's smash presence is somewhat lacking on SWF. I would love for them to be more involved, not that I'm trying to download AiB, but basically everywhere else in North America is represented fine on SWF. You can't blame some people from not knowing most of an group that is based out of SWF, though perhaps if anything this is a wake up call to have more of a AiB presence.

However, I wonder how the results would be if you asked them how many members of the BBR could they name? If someone can nail like 4 names out of 17 for the URC, that's hitting 23% of it. Do you know how many members are in the BBR? Over 96. The current list I can find has 96 members listed, though I know there are that haven't been updated on the list. This is technically public information as you can go through every member on SWF and see what groups they are in. Those same people are going to have to name around 23 members to hit the same % of what they guessed in the URC. Surely though you can just throw out names of top players and hope they are in the BBR when naming them. Though some food for thought... ADHD, Mew2King, Tyrant, Fatal, Atomsk, and more are not currently in the BBR. Though some of them may have been at one point or another, they have either left (because of their discontent with the BBR) or were removed at one point or other. However despite not being in it, it means they wouldn't have been a part of a Meta Knight discussion if held now, which is what you seem to have wanted.

The Meta Knight issue we are tackling here largely is a part of the North American scene, encompassing US and Canada. Yes international discussion can help, but discussing how North America can be different on the MK issue over South America, Europe, and Japan is an entirely different debate. Did you know that 16 members of the BBR are not from North America? Do you think that this could effect a Meta Knight decision made for the North America? It certainly would. I dare your lackeys to name 23% of the BBR members from outside of North America lol.

Of the 17 URC members, 7 of us are from the BBR as well. In looking at this, I'm actually shocked that you aren't one of those members Mike, and that you're advocating for a group like the BBR to make the decision. For those of us not in the BBR, we have members that are also parts of other groups on SWF that can be just as important, such as Smash Researchers. I believe 4 of the URC members are also Smash Researchers, 2 of which are also in the BBR. That leaves 9 people of the 17 who are also in other groups, who you could call multi-talented and important in more than one aspect. The URC is a group of Tournament Organizers, and it's hard to say that none of us in there aren't actually organizers. However, that doesn't mean all of the groups can not work together on Smashboards. The BBR has called for information from the Smash Lab before. Prior to the Meta Knight debate in the URC, the BBR held a series of discussions on Meta Knight between all of their members. Transcripts (summarized version, etc) of said discussions (by members who took part in it that approved of it, which was nearly 100%) were provided to the URC to help aid us in deciding the outcome of the Meta Knight issue. We have also taken look at everything the BBR has done in the past concerning Meta Knight, so to mostly imply that the BBR had no hand in this is basically... wrong.

We don't accept anyone quite as easily as you say. The only true stipulations to being a URC are that you need to use the Unity Ruleset, and that you are an active tournament hosts with upcoming events on the horizon. We have a soft cap of members we don't exceed to try to keep discussion organized and civil, and to help balance out regional representation. No, we do not look for character representation, so excuse us if no one in the URC mains Meta Knight. That isn't to say that no Meta Knight mains had their hand to discuss the topic, because we paid very close attention to the Unity Discussion Topic, other topics in general, and the polls held on AiB and SWF, which everyone had access to, regardless of who you mained. If getting into the URC was as easy as it seems, then I suppose we should have never declined anyone right? Because we have, and none of them were Meta Knight mains to my knowledge.

When the URC first started, I was very discontent with it's member list sort of like how you are now, but I eventually came around. I figured that while I didn't feel the BBR was the right governing body for a ruleset, I felt that there are people qualified to help make ruleset decisions that aren't necessarily TOs. But then I eventually realized something... When a TO hosts an event, they need to decide on the ruleset. Whether they use a ruleset already made or create their own, they give a flat out YES or NO answer to every single rule. They are deciding the fate of their ruleset and tournament. When a tournament organizer becomes successful through huge events or successful long going series, they are doing something right. That is what the member list of the URC is comprised of. Successful tournament hosts with an edge to regional representation. Regional representation is important in that, we all know tournaments in each region aren't the same. Just as a while ago Midwest players were adamant about stages such as Port Town and Green Greens being legal, but you better not DARE suggest those stages in Atlantic North. Having representation from various regions and communities is important so everyone comes together on an equal balance (aka UNITY), and who better than a successful tournament organizer from there to be their representation? The tournament organizer's forte is not frame data or tournament results, it's listening to the community and knowing what is best to do. Afterall, they want to attract the largest number of entrants to their tourney right? If they need help from masters of other aspects of the Brawl community, they are free to ask, and have. This applies to all groups, just as the BBR has asked the Smash Lab for help, despite being the most appropriate group of the best and well known smashers according to you.

And so when all is said and done, after two recent public polls that equate to roughly a 75/25 split on pro/anti ban, 3 years of endless discussion from the public where the topic would be brought up mere months after stopping if it ended up in anti ban, MK banned tournaments catching on in every single region, and a public initiative to track many statistics and data (that most of us would agree have overall been on the anti ban side of things) - it's not hard to see this inevitably coming, and the representations for all communities coming together to do this (in such a largely positive manner with 14/17 Yes votes).


WELP I spent a lot more time than I had planned to on making that post lol.

Also, get out of my state.

 

[Nike.]

Nice video, and I'm jelly of your computer screen lol.
What camera did you use?

 

[Masky]

..........

 

[Player-1]

@Masky:

By the way, our straw poll on MK ban (a poll to find out each member's stance on MK's legality before any discussion took place) was 11 wanting to ban him, 3 against the ban, and 1 being neutral. About 73% for the ban, and 20% against it which is in the general area of what the community poll was. T1mmy is a member of the URC and you kind of see where he voted/didn't vote from the categories: for banning, against banning, abstaining from voting, and abstaining from voting due to inactivity. http://allisbrawl.com/blogpost.aspx?id=125097.


So it was only after a lot of discussion of the subject did it turn into 14-0-1-2

TBH, the only person that IMO is pretty biased in the URC is Xyro (soz xyro <3), and that's only when it comes to MK debate, but, I mean, his input is still good IMO, he brings up good points to be discussed.

 

[CT Chia]

The BBR part of the BBR-RC was because of the higher ups at SWF and we have wanted the name to be different the whole time, and we have been adamant about the room being separate from the very beginning. We were only finally given clearance for the name change recently, so we did it.

Also Masky, I find it funny how you've said that about them being top players coming from you, being in the same league and all to make such a statement. And if you want to get into top, it's really only Mike imo. However to imply the majority of us aren't skilled is incredibly wrong.

 

[Gimpyfish62]

<3 mikehaze

 

[Nike.]

Oh, and you should've made this before losing the beard and hair.
Vid would have been complete.

 

[Masky]

..........

 

[CT Chia]

What? I'm not allowed to have an opinion because I'm not a top player? Ironic...

Irony was the whole point of my statement.

Everyone regardless of skill is allowed to have their opinion, and we have all taken it into consideration.

And as far as top players and the URC goes, top players aren't the ones responsible (nor the best at) making sure more people come to events and knowing how to listen and represent their community to keep such numbers large.

Also, top players account for what... 5% of tournaments? Rule changes effect all 100%, and I would say TOs are the most trustworthy persons able to make decisions that effect a community when bringing in numbers to events.

 

[Masky]

..........

 

[CT Chia]

We have the information from the knowledgable ones though, which mostly anyone is able to interpret. "Meta Knight has no bad matchups" comes straight from the BBR Matchup Chart for example. Then anyone in the right mind, URC or not, can look at MK's MU chart made by the knowledgable ones and see no characters under -1, -2, -3, and -4

 

[popsofctown]

I don't mind if URC members aren't ranked #4 nationally or anything silly like that.

I was somewhat displeased that none of them truly main Meta Knight. As in, play Meta Knight and only Meta Knight, for all his matchups, which is probably the optimal way to play him.

 

[Masky]

..........

 

[Cassio]

I would say TOs are the most trustworthy persons able to make decisions that effect a community when bringing in numbers to events.

Why is this again? Judging from the response it seems like even people that agree with the MK ban dont necessarily agree the URC, as it currently stands and is conducted, well represents the community.

 

[Player-1]

So I'm kind of curious. I'm pretty sure most of the community agrees with most of the ruleset we have in place except maybe a few things (like stages such as PS2 being legal or maybe infinites?) So if a band of top players came together and formed some ruleset committee instead of the URC and most of the community hates it then you guys would still be fine with it?

Also, the term "top player" is pretty unclear. Who exactly is a top player? Some random who can beat M2K in FFAs with all items on set to high? Under those rules I guess he would be. M2K would be a top player under the current rules. Whose to say that some top player isn't a top player anymore under new rules some top player committee made? Would you kick that player out? That would be a pretty unstable committee. Not to mention that would probably lead to more biased decisions. They're all top players who'd want to stay at the top and can make rules to suit their needs.

Also, we're trying to make the game more competitive. Understanding the current metagame doesn't mean you know how to make a game more competitive necessarily.

 

[theunabletable]

Also, we're trying to make the game more competitive. Understanding the current metagame doesn't mean you know how to make a game more competitive necessarily.

defend RC/Brinstar as hard as you do in other threads, and then claim that your goal is to make the game more competitively viable? hmm...

Also one thing I'd be interested in knowing is how many of the people in the URC are people who support wholeheartedly the legalization of RC and Brinstar, and how much that correlates with wanting MK banned. I always find it ironic that the people who claim to not want to ban anything, and want to have all those ridiculous, uncompetitive stages legal, also seem to usually want to ban MK

 

[Player-1]

I haven't defended brinstar as I'm borderline with it. RC is a perfectly fine stage, we don't want to remove stage diversity and depth from the game because that takes away competitive aspects of the game, it's that simple.

 

[DeLux]

Mike,

If not maining MK is a crime, then I am guilty as charged.
If not being among the elite players in the country is a flaw, then I admit my imperfections.
If not knowing the entire scope of the metagame is a fault, then I take the blame.

I understand the point of the video. I just don't understand its intent. If the community feels that I am unqualified for the role I play, I will resign without question.

However, I took into consideration every MK mains sentiment. I deferred to the top players opinion when it was called for. I have dedicated large amounts of time to advancing the metagame because of my willingness to admit that I could always know more. Not being on the top let's me keep my ego in check and makes me more willing to listen to advice from all levels.

These flaws in the URC that you see are what I feel are its greatest strengths.

 

[Marc]

I think the vid touches on feelings many people have. I definitely believe that the majority of the American smash scene (posting on Smashboards) would support a MK ban, but a 14-0 vote out of 17 people is extremely onesided. I'm not going to elaborate because I can also see the URC and don't want to compromise them, but both sides of the argument not being represented equally isn't a stretch.

It is interesting that the BBR is brought up in this context. I'm going to be fair and say that the majority of the BBR would probably lean towards a ban, but with a lot more nuances and consideration for unexplored avenues. We didn't have a straight up yes/no vote in a long time though and we're kind of irrelevant here anyway because the URC has been given complete control over the ruleset for the US/Canada. Qualifications don't matter when you have the power to enforce, that's how the world works unless people rebel against it. People never really liked the BBR's recommendations because they were given a range rather than something they could straight up copy/paste, as well as the BBR's tendency to not ban something until deemed broken. Unity is pretty much what the American community asked for in that sense, as they think for you and run with it too.

On a sidenote, Brawl's top players are generally lazy when it comes to contributing and helping out on the boards, with some exceptions. This lead to several of them not being in the BBR anymore, because activity requirements are the same for everyone and people who don't apply properly don't get in in the first place. That said, we still have people like Ally and DEHF and all members have equal input on staple releases like the tier list and, more recently, the matchup chart. Inactive members get purged after a while and we have applications for new members about twice a year, so the BBR will remain healthy as long as the scene is. If you want a stronger scene or even a stronger BBR, put in the effort on the boards as well as in tournaments. We'll see it.

 

[-Ran]

I agree with what Mikehaze, Chibo, and Marc have each said, in different lights. I feel that the deficiencies of our knowledge/skill actually lead us to seeking out more knowledge. Yes, I'm at best a state level competitor when I play. I'm knowledgeable enough in the game to be in the Back Room and Smash Labs, and my actual results put me at fourth place in Louisiana while I was there. From what I've seen since my move, I'm arguably the best player in Colorado. The best I ever did at an out of state tournament was ninth at a Dallas event. I've placed in the top twenties in hundred men Texas events, but by no means would I say that I'm near the upper echelon of players.

However, this also means that I'm constantly hungry for information. I do not view my opinion or knowledge as complete. When there were posts to be read, I indulged in every one. I've read almost every single post in the Unity Thread, every post in the current MK banned thread, and probably 95% of the threads that have been posted in regards to the subject at hand. So far, I have been pleased with the reception [both good and bad] from the ban.

 

[Krystedez]

I posted a comment on the video. I feel it is completely degrading and hypocritical of someone to scrutinize and judge ALL players within the URC as players unfit or unqualified to make decisions about the tournaments THEY run due to their experience in the metagame or with the character Meta Knight.

Especially when they actually DO have experience in the metagame and with MK...

Meant to add that in..

 

[mikeHAZE]

To be fair, Today used to use MK in Doubles before. Not that she mains him. But I'm pretty sure TOs, who have all participated in Brawl events before and either used or mained MK for one purpose or another at one time or another, have some sort of inkling of Meta Knight's abilities as a character.

Also, the poll and the data gathered by John#'s and other members in this research, all have valid evidence.

MK is banned. And we like it.

1) I hate to go to MK debate but this is ********. So anybody who has played metaknight a few times and has run a tournament should be able to judge if a character is broken or not??

2) I never said anything to discredit John# or any of the data charts/research posted anywhere. I never said that they "dont have valid evidence." Infact, i never said anything about my opinions on Metaknight banned or not.

I posted a comment on the video. I feel it is completely degrading and hypocritical of someone to scrutinize and judge ALL players within the URC as players unfit or unqualified to make decisions about the tournaments THEY run due to their experience in the metagame or with the character Meta Knight.

Especially when they actually DO have experience in the metagame and with MK...

Meant to add that in..

Krystedez, you continue to think that the video is about metaknight. This video's intention is to raise overall awareness about the people who are voting on your rulesets.[.b]

In all of your posts both here and on the video you keep making arguments about how metaknight this or that, when i haven't even stated my opinion on whether or not i feel MK should be banned! When i said "none of these members main metaknight" in the video, i wasn't somehow excluding myself and saying i was qualified to judge.

Yours and many other posts i've read are silly as they only touch upon the MK subject, i would appreciate it if you would please stop taking things out of context and take what is said for what it is worth.






EDIT: Please take this to PM's if you would like to continue this debate. I won't respond as i don't care to argue anything other than you jumping to silly conclusions, but i also don't want to flood this thread with irrelevant posts.

If you want to talk about metaknight being banned, here's the link:

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=311729

Like i've said many times now, the point of this video is to raise overall awareness about the people who are voting on your rulesets, not one specific rule.

 

[Blacknight99923]

I haven't defended brinstar as I'm borderline with it. RC is a perfectly fine stage, we don't want to remove stage diversity and depth from the game because that takes away competitive aspects of the game, it's that simple.

I have 1 huge issue with the URC right now.

A tournament could be a unity event with metaknight banned given absolutely ZERO notice.Tyrant and I could have been driving to a tournament today and MK could have been banned, 0 notice. The announcement yesterday should have stated metaknight would be banned after January 9th he should not have been banned before that point in ANYWAY without giving metaknight mains notice. I have to HOPE mikehaze keeps metaknight legal until after apex.


Imagine this URC, and please actually imagine it and not just read this.
read that again^

You log onto swf, there is a huge thread about the fact your character has been banned (just insert your character here and do not put metaknight in your head). All of a sudden by over half the TO's in teh country your character is now legally bannable :O. There was no announcement, you haven't really put nearly the amount of time into your secondaries as you did your main ( I mean why would you its your main LOL) and now without any notice the touranmetn that takes place TOMMOROW could have your character banend :O.
You've now been left up to the mercy of your tournament host to PRAY that he doesn't ban your character until the dead line because your secondaries aren't practiced, match ups haven't been studied, and now (since yesterday was a friday) tommorow (being today) you have to either attend a tournament with your free *** falco(or whatever character you secondary) or not go at all.


**** MIKE I HOPE YOU DON'T BAN (insert char) TOMMOROW.

:O :O :O :O :O :O :O

^ Thats literally what you, the URC, did.

Did it even occur to you, being metaknight free URC, that giving people the option to ban metaknight NOW wasn't in anyway unfair to his mains? I seriously doubt you'd be as eager to attend. But right now hypothetically its COMPLETELY LEGAL for 20+% of the community to be without their mains given NO NOTICE.



Metkanight mains have to hope their local TO's don't **** **** them on the fly because there was no warning about metaknight being banned. Metaknight should not in any way have been GLOBALLY banned BEFORE apex. It should have been an announcement saying 3 months and then metkanights banned. Its possible I'm overreacting and I sincerely hope that's the case.



I'm not going to argue metaknight didn't deserve to be banned, it was going to happen. But the way the URC went about it was just complete bias imo. I sincerely hope tournament organizers keep metaknight legal until after apex.

 

[AlphaZealot]

First, I'll speak to the video. I like it. This is the kind of critical analysis that will allow the group to evolve and improve. Mike, as a member, you can steer the group so that quality improves. If you do not like all the TO's in the group, or feel different TO's are needed for entry, just post who they are!

Second, I'll briefly touch on my own qualifications. On one side of things I've been a player for a few years. I've been ranked in Ohio ever since the rankings came out, including being ranked #1 for most of 2009 until M2K moved to the state. I've beaten or taken games from many of the players currently ranked in the top 20 of the SWF Rankings, and I've been ranked in the top 100 since the lists inception - at my peak being ranked as high as 12th. I was considered for a very long time a top 3-5 Diddy Kong main and only recently fell off (largely because of my TOing 2010 MLG circuit, where I was not allowed to play). I've won thousands in prize money at tournaments and done decently at some nationals/regionals (4/115 at SiiS4, 13/128 EVO2k9, 17/198 Pound 4) and almost always beat ranked players at events while losing only to ranked players. Many people have copied my Diddy Kong and strategies/gimmicks I created since I have more videos posted of Diddy Kong than any other person who uses the character.

As a TO, I've hosted 5 nationals (all the MLG's with an average attendance ~180) plus multiple regionals and tons of locals. In all around 20 different tournaments in two years.

Probably the thing that trumps all of this though is that I use to be anti-ban. Not just anti-ban, but one of the leaders of the anti-ban movement. Heck, it was myself (and Umbreon) in the the very first live-podcast MK debate where we represented the anti-ban side against Overswarm (and I forget who else). I'm a believer in a character showing without a doubt they are a problem and Meta Knight fits this description more than any character in any fighting game ever - and a huge difference with any previous character-ban precedents is that the Smash community has the data from thousands of tournaments to back up what we say. Akuma was banned in HD remix. He didn't even have 10% of all players using him and didn't win a quarter of what MK did - yet he got banned. Even so, making references to other fighting games is flawed logic: the Smash community is different, separate, and we need to set our own precedents.

Moving a bit more forward - it is important to note that it isn't just 14 random people making a decision. It is 14 TO's. Who run tournaments. Who all agreed to the same thing. Who in 2012 will likely run roughly 50-100 events, or about 20% of all of the 500 Smash tournaments in the country. Probably more since the number of overall tournaments is in decline and URC represent some of the most active TO's. These TO's are going to run tournaments with or without the Unity ruleset, and they are going to have rules for these tournaments. Implying that they aren't qualified to make a decision on banning MK is basically saying we should be having EVERY TO pass some sort of qualification test before we even allow them to run tournaments. You can look at tons of different rulesets, and if they aren't using the Unity Ruleset, there are usually tons of holes in them or other problems.

Essentially my point is that the Unity Ruleset Committee is made up of Tournaments Organizers who hold tournaments frequently. They are making rules for their tournaments anyways - now they are simply working together in doing so. To say they aren't qualified to make rules for tournaments doesn't really make a difference: since they are going to run their own tournament with the ruleset anyways. If you have an issue then you can work to improve membership with TO's who are better. Speaking of which, which TO's are better? Most TO's who aren't in the URC refuse to acknowledge anything but their own personal stance on every single rule. It has been a huge problem: many tournament organizers only look out for themselves and refuse to compromise. It is the same mentality that causes multiple nationals/regionals in a 6 week time period like we saw earlier this summer. Why schedule around someone else when all you care about is yourself, for example? The people in the committee are at least taking that step to work together and to give up a little of their own beliefs so we finally have some sort of standard in this community, which is something it has lacked since its inception over 7 years ago.

 

[Krystedez]

...Mike, like I said, I never cared if you wanted MK banned or not, nor did I say that you were discreditting (but rather you ARE ignoring) evidence of John#'s charts and other research devoted to the overall decision made here. This includes judging Meta Knight's influence on the metagame, and having one member who's played or used them for a purpose or another is even better than NO ONE PLAYS METAKNIGHT WHY?

I'm not discussing this with you by PM, because it's not appropriate. I feel it's necessary other people know just how muddled up your points got, and why I think you're being unreasonable and vague, as well as not making sense when you tell me that you're not talking about Meta Knight, when at the core, that's what the whole point of the video ends up being about: The decision.
______________________
0:14-0:16 - Your attention getter.

"...decided today that Meta Knight is going to be banned from tourney play."

0:16-0:21

"If you've been following any of the drama on smashboards, this probably doesn't come as much as a surprise to you."

______________________
You then decide to actually work into your supposed thesis. You got the attention getter out. You want to let people know who the URC members are. And their qualifications. You put a few bit of details on each of them.

______________________
1:45-1:52 - Evidence
"Out of these 17 members, 14 members voted to ban Meta Knight, there was one abstaining, and two inactive."

You now touch on the actual evidence you want to use to portray the qualifications of the URC member base as a whole. You continue with . . .

______________________
1:53-1:57 - Evidence
"Out of the total 17 members, none of them main Meta Knight."
Is that so?
______________________
1:58-2:01 - Main Point 1
"Here's something to think about. Anybody can be admitted to the URC."
Okay.
______________________
2:09-2:12 - Main Point 1 - Anyone can be in the URC.
"You can potentially be admitted into the URC."
This is interesting, so, what are the limits to being in the URC? Let's see.

1. You have to be able to afford to run tournaments.
2. You have to get a decent amount of attendees and experience (don't give me that "you don't even have to have large tournaments" crap. I know I couldn't get in the URC with my experience as a TO, having run ONE event with unity, that got 7 people and helped Today once or twice in running bracket. you can't honestly tell me that's enough)
______________________
2:12-2:20 - Main Point 2 - Members of BBR are not in URC
"What this brings up is the quality of a member of the URC."
"Previous votes on the Meta Knight ban subject were taken care of by a committee called the Brawl Back Room, which consisted of the most prominent players and tournament organizers in the community."

So, wait, we're now comparing URC to the BBR of past years? Okay, trying to follow here.

You rattle off some good players' names, and continue on:
______________________
2:34-2:36
"The List goes on, but you see my point."

Your point is beginning to get muddled a bit. I believe it's "URC members don't have these players in it " now, when it used to be "I'm going to analyze the URC members directly".

Wonderful... Moving on.
______________________
2:36-2:41 - Main Point 2's Subpoint
"These players that voted on these polls were the best of the best. They truly understood the metagame."

The BBR members consisted of people that hosted tournaments and/or were good players. Their goal was to shape the tier list and come up with as many ideas and projects as possible to help give the community something to talk about, something to discuss, something to adhere to when asking the same questions over and over.

Moving on from that, BBR members aren't the only experts of the metagame.

And let's direct our attention to your top comment and response for a sec:

You have to be a top player to have an accurate opinion on MK? ADHD whines when he loses to MK, M2K whines when he loses to Diddy. They would vote to ban MK and Diddy. In other words, this video makes no sense, because top players can be just as biased quite easily, rather than the TOs who run the tourneys.

And you responded quite swiftly with

"You should address the part where Top Players actually have in depth knowledge about game play, unlike many of the TO's in the URC."

I disagree with that. Many of the TO's are in their position in the first place because of how they impacted the community and shown their ability to run tournaments with large numbers. They use a ruleset that community has generally fallen in line with or even liked. Otherwise, they wouldn't have that much attendance and wouldn't be as respected.

Moving on!
______________________
2:43-2:51
"If you were to compare the quality of players that I just mentioned to the current Unity Ruleset Committee, you would understand why the structure of the URC is extremely frustrating to begin with."
All you've shown to me by comparing them is that the URC doesn't have the Greats like ADHD and Ally or M2K and Gnes. You've shown to me that the members of URC's skill level is loads lower than those guys who are or USED to be in the BBR, or need to be if they aren't already. You have shown to me, that in order for a player to be qualified to make decisions as member of the URC, they have to be up to par, have to be the same mindset and understanding of the meta game as these players, and that it's a direct relationship with their skill level.

At least, you have shown to me that this is your opinion, and I'm not convinced that a decision such as banning Meta Knight would have been dealt with any better than it was now. The decision and all decisions made in the URC are by members that do have a good understanding of the meta game and have used Meta Knight or know his characteristics in the current metagame.

I mentioned John#'s and other research held in this regard as even more evidence to show that the players in the URC understand the metagame. Perhaps they don't understand it EXACTLY how top players do. But they have an understanding nonetheless, and it isn't right for you to judge that understanding as being a direct relationship with their skill level. You are not qualified to judge the amount of understanding. They are simply different.

Your thesis was originally identifying the members and their qualifications of the URC. The title however says "WHO EXACTLY BANNED META KNIGHT", you never brought up the quality of each member specifically, but hoard them all up in a direct measure of their knowledge of the metagame and whether or not they main MK. You then yell at me for saying it's all about Meta Knight, when I'm clearly just identifying the weakness of your thesis (or lack thereof).

In other words, your points were strong attention getters but not backed up by any sort of evidence or personal experience with the URC being unqualified, except with your opinion that top players with higher skill would have been more qualified to make decisions in such a critical time... Your two main points don't align with your thesis.

Finishing that end off with my comment on your 3:00 marker earlier, how I said "Why don't MK mains go out and host tournaments, then?" That was like, a comment toward your idea that anyone can join. If that is true, then why haven't players went out of their way to host tournaments, so they can be apart of the decision making?

I'll finish up with the rest of the other points made..
______________________
3:18-3:22
"I'd love to see some members of the URC try to commentate some live matches"

I think AZ commentated on some live matches with Day's tournament. I'm not sure. I don't see why they wouldn't be capable of commentating, or how that's relevant at all to your thesis.

______________________
3:24-3:27
"I feel some of the members are completely biased and un-knowledgeable about the meta game."

Why is that? What is your measure of their knowledge? Evidence? At all?

That wraps up my comments on this. I could care less if you don't respond, but I mean, I'll just have to ask; why bother wasting time posting a video blog about it and then linking it to everyone, saying you're giving an opinion on the other URC members? Why don't you discuss it with them, or say outright who you believe are unqualified?

 

[M@v]

look, I didn't mean to sound harsh, but this video came as a shock to me, and one of my biggest pet peeves is people not bringing their problems straight to me(or in this case, a group I'm in). This isn't just in smash; that's a life rule for me. That being said; I just wish you of 100% verified everything 1st.

 

[Hippieslayer]

Really nice Analysis Krystedez.

I also wonder, what would the bias of to's? Being able to keep on running tournaments?
I honestly don't feel like it would make sense for to's to go around being bitter and pissed over the fact that MK owns them.

Also, what makes a top player great is obviously very much the intuitive thought process they have going on during games. That's not really something that guarantees or even requires a overt, expressable understanding of the metagame.

Furthermore, if we take a step and look at the whole situtation, then this video is basically just one big ad hominem. Instead of pretending it was those 14 votes that went and did it, how about actually critizing why they did? Like you know look at their sources and point out where they were wrong?

It's like dissing a book on an academic subject by saying the author doesn't necessarily have any idea what he is talking about, even though the author clearly explains his reasoning on the subject and has a big reference list to boot.

 

[Spelt]

This is true, the first course of action should be to fix the holes in our ruleset and only after that - if it is deemed truly necessary - should any character be considered for a ban. Even if a character is still considered ban-worthy after poorly-construed rules have been fixed, we can at least say we put forth the effort (plus we would have decent rules in use for all events).

It's funny that people are still saying things like this almost 4 years into the game's metagame.

You guys would've been saying the same thing 5 years from now if MK still wasn't banned.

Ridiculous.



Also, great post Krystedez.

 

[Player-1]

I have 1 huge issue with the URC right now.

A tournament could be a unity event with metaknight banned given absolutely ZERO notice.Tyrant and I could have been driving to a tournament today and MK could have been banned, 0 notice. The announcement yesterday should have stated metaknight would be banned after January 9th he should not have been banned before that point in ANYWAY without giving metaknight mains notice. I have to HOPE mikehaze keeps metaknight legal until after apex.


Imagine this URC, and please actually imagine it and not just read this.
read that again^

You log onto swf, there is a huge thread about the fact your character has been banned (just insert your character here and do not put metaknight in your head). All of a sudden by over half the TO's in teh country your character is now legally bannable :O. There was no announcement, you haven't really put nearly the amount of time into your secondaries as you did your main ( I mean why would you its your main LOL) and now without any notice the touranmetn that takes place TOMMOROW could have your character banend :O.
You've now been left up to the mercy of your tournament host to PRAY that he doesn't ban your character until the dead line because your secondaries aren't practiced, match ups haven't been studied, and now (since yesterday was a friday) tommorow (being today) you have to either attend a tournament with your free *** falco(or whatever character you secondary) or not go at all.


**** MIKE I HOPE YOU DON'T BAN (insert char) TOMMOROW.

:O :O :O :O :O :O :O

^ Thats literally what you, the URC, did.

Did it even occur to you, being metaknight free URC, that giving people the option to ban metaknight NOW wasn't in anyway unfair to his mains? I seriously doubt you'd be as eager to attend. But right now hypothetically its COMPLETELY LEGAL for 20+% of the community to be without their mains given NO NOTICE.



Metkanight mains have to hope their local TO's don't **** **** them on the fly because there was no warning about metaknight being banned. Metaknight should not in any way have been GLOBALLY banned BEFORE apex. It should have been an announcement saying 3 months and then metkanights banned. Its possible I'm overreacting and I sincerely hope that's the case.



I'm not going to argue metaknight didn't deserve to be banned, it was going to happen. But the way the URC went about it was just complete bias imo. I sincerely hope tournament organizers keep metaknight legal until after apex.

Okay, first off I'd like to say that MK is OPTIONALLY banned until Apex. Two different versions of the Ruleset: one with him and one without. Now assuming that you DO realize this then yes I think you are overacting, if you didn't realize this then I'd probably be just as upset as you (well not really since I don't main MK =p).

The rule changes are up to TO discretion ultimately, so there is no reason to be mad at us, only the TO who changed the rules. It's not like we're going to drop them from having unity support just because they didn't run 2.0 the day after it came out, that would be ridiculous, so it's not like there would be any reason to not run their old tournament rules except for their own personal gain, so yeah I'd blame the TO, not us.

 

[Zigsta]

The biggest problem I have with the video is the first and second part of it seem contradictory to me. Your intro made it seem like your goal was to shed light to the community exactly who's in the URC and then expand on each member a bit more. I was really looking forward to it and instantly thought it was a fantastic idea: Any government entity that doesn't "show its face" enough in public easily causes the public to doubt their credibility.

As the video progressed, though, it seemed more to me like you were calling out the URC for being unqualified, which I don't understand. I've been in groups and organizations in the past that have been extremely unorganized and poorly led, but I NEVER revealed that to anyone outside of my family and closest friends. Any community, especially a large one, is easily influenced by a figurehead who commands respect. In this case, you're an incredibly admired, respected, and well-known player. You posting a video immediately commands attention. Your use of a locked-down tripod, a better than decent camera, shot differentiation, and well-calculated and constructed background show you put a lot of effort into the making of this seemingly simple and short video. As a film student, I may pick this up more than others, but your composition no doubt had a subconscious effect on many viewers. This ain't no JG Wentworth shakeycam!

For me personally, this video comprises two objectives, and only one should have been revealed to the public, and it would have been VERY beneficial. Calling out an organization you're part of, though, should be addressed within the organization itself at first, and if you're not getting anywhere, that's when you take it public. Just be wary that pointing fingers at your comrades has its consequences.

While I don't agree with your reasoning, I'm glad to see players such as yourself make personal videos like these. Oftentimes skilled players don't want to dedicate time to give back to the community with videos, but the ones who do really help out the community, especially newer players to the scene. And your video has led to intelligent conversation, not just people literally posting "lol mk banned."

 

[B.A.M.]

Can I get someone from URC to tell me what is wrong with this post of mine? And can someone please tell me why ppl are still bringing up john#s data when they clearly don't understand what it is stating? Its getting sickening.

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=13443815&postcount=1306

 

[Cassio]

Krystedez I can understand why you made your post, but you need to think things completely through or make some important connections.

btw for anyone who doesnt want to read that whole post, you can just read what Im about to quote for the actual important stuff.

The decision and all decisions made in the URC are by members that do have a good understanding of the meta game and have used Meta Knight or know his characteristics in the current metagame.

And you know this how? Unless youre a secret URC member Mike has access to information you, I, and the rest of the community do not. In fact hes been quite considerate to not leak anything and many URC members have thanked him for this.

Quite honestly his assertion is really not hard too believe and whats more is that members of the URC havent even denied it. Listening to virtually any mid-level player or below talk about the metagame as if theyre an expert on it can quite honestly make you want to listen to something else. And even more honestly, the URC consists of such members. I dont mean to be rude but in my experience either having directly spoken with certain members about brawl or listened to them discuss it, I definitely feel as though they weren't up to par. Not when compared to speaking with someone who really knows what theyre talking about.

Your thesis was originally identifying the members and their qualifications of the URC. The title however says "WHO EXACTLY BANNED META KNIGHT", you never brought up the quality of each member specifically, but hoard them all up in a direct measure of their knowledge of the metagame and whether or not they main MK. You then yell at me for saying it's all about Meta Knight, when I'm clearly just identifying the weakness of your thesis (or lack thereof).

In other words, your points were strong attention getters but not backed up by any sort of evidence or personal experience with the URC being unqualified, except with your opinion that top players with higher skill would have been more qualified to make decisions in such a critical time... Your two main points don't align with your thesis.

This is an assumption, but I dont believe he intended to call out every member on their skill (maybe for other reasons, but not necessarily skill). However you'll notice that certain URC members havent even attempted to defend themselves.

I also think its completely silly that youre telling him his video is about the metaknight ban when he specifically said it wasnt about the metaknight ban.

I mentioned John#'s and other research held in this regard as even more evidence to show that the players in the URC understand the metagame. Perhaps they don't understand it EXACTLY how top players do. But they have an understanding nonetheless, and it isn't right for you to judge that understanding as being a direct relationship with their skill level. You are not qualified to judge the amount of understanding. They are simply different.

Ok, but how does this pertain at all to being a TO. Yeah TOs have the final say about their tournaments, no ones denied that. But this says absolutely nothing about TOs being better judges of such information, which you seem to believe.

 

[Tesh]

So I went out today and asked 15 people if murder was wrong. 14 said yes, 1 said he didn't want to answer my question.

Mikehaze would claim there is a bias against murder and poll 15 convicted killers instead.

 

[Cassio]

So I went out today and asked 15 people if murder was wrong. 14 said yes, 1 said he didn't want to answer my question.

Mikehaze would claim there is a bias against murder and poll 15 convicted killers instead.

Do I even need to state why this is a terrible analogy?

 

[Spelt]

Only if you're a terrorist.

 

[John12346]

B.A.M., I'll bite, what exactly is wrong with the way my data is being interpreted?

What does it mean to you?

 

[Krystedez]

Cassio:

I am under the impression the URC knows the metagame enough because I know a few players personally in that committee that have played this game the entire three years and are known entities in the smash community. They also have made sound discussion and reasoning about the game in the past, and have lead important projects and tournaments.

AlphaZealot, Today, T_chase both come to mind far as personally knowing them.
Player 1 I've played quite a few times on wifi and talked to.
T-Block I've played and know his abilities as a player and feel he is qualified.
Chibo I've had the pleasure of discussing the matchup chart with on various levels (Pit and Wario).

Yink I've talked to on numerous occasions and can vouch for her knowledge of the meta game and ability to make decisions for this community.
UTDZ defeated me in bracket with his stellar GW at MLG, and I can tell just from talking to the guy he's good AND qualified as a player and for important choices like this.

Xyro, Z'Zagashi I've played. Both I don't know enough about.

M@V, Tin Man, Ran, Biscuit, and Mike Haze are the only ones I have not had the pleasure of playing or observing either at a distance or in personal.

As far as my "assumption" goes, if you had watched the video, I think you would fine that it's not far from the truth. look at the responses, and look at the replies here. Even Zigsta put it way better than I did.

What MikeHaze seems to believe that if your name isn't M2K, Ally, ADHD, or some other big name, and you're not in the BBR, and you don't have someone who mains meta knight in that group, then they are not qualified to make decisions in the URC. He didn't make one attempt to evaluate the efforts of any of these members, but simply showed this "evidence" and made jokes.

Finally, the reason that data like John#'s charts and OTHER people's contributions make a significant impact on their (the URC members) qualifications, is because they support and look into these research methods. The fact that he completely ignores that and just goes on saying the evidences brought up, saying they're not qualified for his deemed reasons is completely unsatisfactory.

 

[Cassio]

When I said assumption I meant the one I was to make. Your statement wasnt an assumption it just wasnt thought completely through because Mike is limited in what he can share.

I am under the impression the URC knows the metagame enough because I know a few players personally in that committee that have played this game the entire three years and are known entities in the smash community.

Its not really a judgement we can make since we cant see the conversations ourselves.

As far as Zigsta's comment those are his own personal feelings. Of course I could see why it would be easy for him and yourself to say that because youre part of such organizations. As a community member that is on the outside yet affected by such decisions I find that thought to be rubbish, but to each their own.