Sheer is, of course correct; last apex's ruleset is subject to change and as no KB adapter existed at that point it's a whole nother discussion now
of course the community doesn't have to vote because it's not their tourney it's alex strife's and he can do what the **** he wants
but the synechdochic apex->tournament thing which is so common these days (and which is SUPER LAME, by the way, apex is ONE great tournament but is not and should not be seen as the scene in its entirety) means that sheer probably in some sense meant to say that tournaments in general or the hypothetical standard ruleset which only kind of exists should be determined by some sort of community vote
of course it's hard to say who composes the "community," so votes like that are really hard to conduct accurately
which is why we have backrooms
but the 64 backroom was a truly ******** idea, the demonic ******* child of melee-parasitism, and the ruleset was basically just written up by asianaussie; it's not bad but it hardly represents a community consensus except inasmuch as AA had a good instinctive sense of what the community consensus was (he did). its power derives from the fact that it's written down and tourney hosts (generally not 64 players and generally not even very interested in 64 rules) need something written down to highlight, copy and paste (possibly making 2-3 changes along the way)
And sheer, it's possible (not certain, but possible) that radically different controller options are undesirable competitively, but it's a small enough level of unfairness that I think it's worth suffering in order to allow maybe 40% of our online community to integrate into the "competitive" (competitive in the strictest sense; online competition exists but it's scarce and ****ty) community.
Degree is the key issue here; obviously we wouldn't allow DI macros just so that one extra guy would show up, but obviously we wouldn't ban all but two of our tourney entrants for the sake of having the venue be 72 degrees instead of 71, even if 72 degrees allows for a marginally higher level of competition.
of course the community doesn't have to vote because it's not their tourney it's alex strife's and he can do what the **** he wants
but the synechdochic apex->tournament thing which is so common these days (and which is SUPER LAME, by the way, apex is ONE great tournament but is not and should not be seen as the scene in its entirety) means that sheer probably in some sense meant to say that tournaments in general or the hypothetical standard ruleset which only kind of exists should be determined by some sort of community vote
of course it's hard to say who composes the "community," so votes like that are really hard to conduct accurately
which is why we have backrooms
but the 64 backroom was a truly ******** idea, the demonic ******* child of melee-parasitism, and the ruleset was basically just written up by asianaussie; it's not bad but it hardly represents a community consensus except inasmuch as AA had a good instinctive sense of what the community consensus was (he did). its power derives from the fact that it's written down and tourney hosts (generally not 64 players and generally not even very interested in 64 rules) need something written down to highlight, copy and paste (possibly making 2-3 changes along the way)
And sheer, it's possible (not certain, but possible) that radically different controller options are undesirable competitively, but it's a small enough level of unfairness that I think it's worth suffering in order to allow maybe 40% of our online community to integrate into the "competitive" (competitive in the strictest sense; online competition exists but it's scarce and ****ty) community.
Degree is the key issue here; obviously we wouldn't allow DI macros just so that one extra guy would show up, but obviously we wouldn't ban all but two of our tourney entrants for the sake of having the venue be 72 degrees instead of 71, even if 72 degrees allows for a marginally higher level of competition.
