On gambling: I think the issue was underage gambling, and a lot of us were underage at the time? If we advertise, we need to say 18+, or we can only allow 18+ in, or something like that. I'm not too sure what the restrictions are, but it was enough for Mike and I to agree that full promotion as a club was not a good idea.
First of all, this notion of Brawl players being players who play only for money is entirely false. For one, it's an absurd generalization. But more importantly, I only need one point to disprove it: smashfests do happen, and the players in question do attend. Sometimes the players in question are even the main push for the smashfest in the first place. So stop talking as if these players are soulless drones who don't have a love for the game. There are better ways to work towards earning money, and everyone knows that - money is not the REASON for playing this game. As for money being a MOTIVATOR, of course it is. It's naive to pretend it isn't for most people, and that will apply to different people in different degrees. But do you pass judgement on OoP players who would only be interested if the pot reached a certain level? Material incentive for competition is a concept that is ingrained in our culture. It's unfair to call people "dirty" for being more motivated after having put something on the line.
On the "free tournament", there actually wasn't overwhelming negativity towards it. You just feel that way because you decided then to bash the entire Brawl community and received backlash for it. As far as the actual event, the issue (and I stated this back then too) was that it REPLACED a money event (ie- betrayed people's expectations), and because it was all improvised, it was a logistical nightmare. I was very clear that I would be interested in a similar event if it was planned beforehand. Others expressed similar interest. I would find proof, but I can't find **** on SWF right now.
Here's my issue, Victor. What you described sounds fantastic. Slightly padded with idealism, perhaps, but all-around I don't think anyone would actually say "pft i dont want that". Given that, it seems obvious to me that the best solution is to allow you to deliver on those words and foster a lively community, while continuing to hold monetary events somewhat under the radar, unsanctioned by the club, and advertised through word-of-mouth. What's wrong with that? As Luke has said multiple times, the Brawl tournaments aren't even running under a club at the moment, so what's preventing these tournaments from continuing to run while your club is up?
But Victor, from you, I'm seeing no attempt to find a better, inclusive solution here. Your "compromise" is to move monetary events completely off-campus, and you refuse to entertain the idea of finding a way to have both on-campus (as Luke actually suggested in the FB thread), immediately citing the gambling policy. It's like you're using this gambling issue to push these "dirty money-grabbing" players off campus. That's what leads me, and others, to think you have an a personal agenda behind your actions. By equating only-plays-for-money with Brawl in general, you make it look like an attempt to arouse and instill anti-Brawl sentiments in both new and old players, masquerading as a well-intentioned push towards unification. If a livelier community is really all you want, I'll do what I can to support you, and I'm sure others will too, but your current approach is absolutely terrible. I get that you have negative feelings towards the Brawl community. Maybe I'll even believe you actually want to be closer to them. But if you can't separate those feelings while making this push, then your actions are actually pushing the communities farther apart.
I also don't understand that statement that Brawl is controlling the Smash community. As I said, a Smash club doesn't even exist on campus right now. No one can stop you if you decided to start your own club. In fact, if you stopped insulting people, maybe they'd help you.
