I used be very into brawl at its inception. I was even decently good. I was good enough that local to's banned the ice climbers infinite chaingrab and had next to the ruling in parenthesis sorry sorto. This being said, i am very against the idea of banning without cause. As any player knows the ic chaingrab is considered legal now and in my story it took a few months, maybe even a year, but this ban was later lifted. I did play after but never quite as seriously as I did during the first few months. But I kept quite knowledgeable in the brawl metagame and discussions.
Along with this I helped run a melee power rankings at my college. So while I am not a true to, I do know how to host an event.
Also, I would like to apologize in advance for my discussion of mk ban since I know this is not an mk ban forum, but a know your urc forum.
I was never in support of banning metaknight, because to me there was never proof to ban him. But again, this all goes to the idea to what is proof for a ban.
I am suprised that the community went directly to a hard ban, instead of soft banning metaknight. I would have much rather have seen the top 15 metaknights agree to not playing metaknight and seeing the evolution of the metagame because of this. Because let's be honest, playing mk doesn't make you win. And the only true threat comes from the top level mks. Has this even been attempted. The top 15 mks would still be doing well without mk. Maybe not as well, but still very well. This option would be a more friendly way to go about it, rather than creating strict ruleset. I already forsee a counter argument to my idea that goes something like this, "well people are not going to want to lose out on money". Since people usually do like money this does create an issue. My simple resolution to this would be that the top 15 mks would be given free entrance to tournaments for not playing mk. This rule would be optional and used as incentive to stop players from playing mk and allowing the metagame to develop. It would be at the tos discretion to boot them if they did not comply. Something to that effect. Honestly there could probably be a better resolution for enforcing a soft or temporary ban (this was just a quick thought).
The reasons for mks bans as far as I know them are not proof of brokeness, as I would say that's hard to prove.
John# thread shows mathematical signs of correlation. Correlation and causality are not the same. These numbers don't exist because metaknight is broken, that shows a lack of logic. I know that john# knows that but I am informing the people who think otherwise.
The matchup chart shows the mk has the best matchups and does not lose any. I feel like that scenario happens more often in fighting games then people like to credit. Fox in melee doesn't lose any matchups either (tho he does even ones).
Final thoughts and argument. In my mind a ruling for banning should not be made to help the advancement of lower tiered characters. It also should not be made to quiet the masses. A ruleset change should be made because it is fair and with just cause.
The brawl ruleset we play by should not be made to make the lower tiers advance or have a fairer chance. A ruleset should be made to be fair to all characters. And a character should not be banned to help the advancement of the low tier. And I only say this because I see a lot of people argue about how mk makes character x unviable and stuff like that. And in all honesty something like that is rarely reason for a ban, unless it is just him and it is a large majority of the cast, which is not the case.
*sorry for any typos. I am on a phone and just kinda typed and did a quick editing job.