Jump to content

March 2022-Movement Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Munya unfeatured this topic
Posted

What's the point of having a tiering policy if you guys don't follow it. Zero argument as to why Dugtrio is banworthy in UU, but not OU. 

 

Ou is the most played tier. We have 210k games played in OU for 4k games played in UU this month. But hey, the Tier Council Staff has not made up their mind regarding Dugtrio in OU. OU is the most stable tier, the most played tier, the tier on which we have gathered more data and knowledge. You expect us to believe that Dugtrio is banworthy in UU, but you don't know about OU? Excuse me, how incompetent are you trying to be? How fucking convenient that while you guys make up your mind this delays the unpleasant decision of throwing a mon into UBER which would force you to make a nerf. There is absolutely no reason why Dugtrio is banned in UU and NU, but not in OU. You either ban it everywhere or no where. The level of incomptence displayed in taking this decision is truly unprecedented. Keep it up.

Posted

The tiering policy has been followed can you provide an exert of where exactly it was not? 

 

If you would like a discussion to be opened on dugtrio for OU, convince someone on TC to propose it and get it started.

Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, gbwead said:

What's the point of having a tiering policy if you guys don't follow it. Zero argument as to why Dugtrio is banworthy in UU, but not OU. 

 

Ou is the most played tier. We have 210k games played in OU for 4k games played in UU this month. But hey, the Tier Council Staff has not made up their mind regarding Dugtrio in OU. OU is the most stable tier, the most played tier, the tier on which we have gathered more data and knowledge. You expect us to believe that Dugtrio is banworthy in UU, but you don't know about OU? Excuse me, how incompetent are you trying to be? How fucking convenient that while you guys make up your mind this delays the unpleasant decision of throwing a mon into UBER which would force you to make a nerf. There is absolutely no reason why Dugtrio is banned in UU and NU, but not in OU. You either ban it everywhere or no where. The level of incomptence displayed in taking this decision is truly unprecedented. Keep it up.

GB, really? How long are you around? You are expecting logics, consistency and reasonability? We both know how it will look like.

1. OU Dugtrio discussion

2. Dugtrio nerf back to 80 atk

3. Dugtrio becomes NU again

4. Dugtrio NU discussion thread

5. Dugtrio UU discussion thread

6. Back to 100 atk

Rinse and repeat

 

E:

By no means this post is supposed to be a jab at TC, I know this isn't exactly up to you guys

Edited by RysPicz
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Munya said:

The tiering policy has been followed can you provide an exert of where exactly it was not? 

 

If you would like a discussion to be opened on dugtrio for OU, convince someone on TC to propose it and get it started.

Stop derailing this thread with your bullshit please. I have been in TC before, I know you never allow us to open tiering discussion in OU. I remember asking at least 100 times for an OU Discussion on Garchomp back when it had access to SD. You denied me the right to open one every time.

 

Also, we both know this is completly pointless because everything said in TC chat is hidden, so we have no way of verifying someone did not ask already. You may have authority over these tiering decisions, but you do not have any credibility whatsoever to be in charge of these decisions. That's why no one is discussing anything in this monthly discussion thread, because time and time again, you proved that discussing anything with you is a completle bureaucratic waste of time.

Edited by gbwead
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, Munya said:

I don't recall ever denying it but I have asked what exactly the problem with it is.

Untitled.png

Is this some kind of joke? Did you really just handpick a quote from the thousands of posts I made in TC chat from which I no longer have access without showing any context or even time stamps showing dates?

 

 

edit: Oh I didn't see you said november 2020. Garchomp SD was banned in August 2020... so this quote is after the ban (which you delayed for 8 months in every way possible just like you are doing right now).

 

edit2: I'm confused... when you edit your post, it doesn't show it was edited because you are staff?

Edited by gbwead
Posted

I edited it to put the date, not at home ATM. Even if I did deny a thread, I may have we will have to see, there's like 30 pages about sand veil so haven't gone through them all, that doesn't prevent a tc member from starting a discussion now. Unless certain circumstances are met such as a vote just closing, not repeating the same vote monthly because of 1 member.  Or if a nerf was just deployed one might be denied to actually give the nerf a chance 

Posted
42 minutes ago, gbwead said:

edit2: I'm confused... when you edit your post, it doesn't show it was edited because you are staff?

Not related but yeah most / all staff members are able to hide when they last edited a post.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Munya said:

I edited it to put the date, not at home ATM. Even if I did deny a thread, I may have we will have to see, there's like 30 pages about sand veil so haven't gone through them all, that doesn't prevent a tc member from starting a discussion now. Unless certain circumstances are met such as a vote just closing, not repeating the same vote monthly because of 1 member.  Or if a nerf was just deployed one might be denied to actually give the nerf a chance 

Do TC members need your authorisation to open a discussion thread? Yes or No?

Posted

Here's how it works. They start a draft, people contribute to draft. After a certain time given no issues I do give the okay to  post it publicly but I've not denied one.

 

Edit: I lied, I denied JJ until he fixed the image

Posted
11 minutes ago, Munya said:

Here's how it works. They start a draft, people contribute to draft. After a certain time given no issues I do give the okay to  post it publicly but I've not denied one.

 

Edit: I lied, I denied JJ until he fixed the image

I made it for you, just post it.

Posted

After looking further, I did deny you once, 10 days after the sand veil nerf, but would have allowed it had you had other TC members support(and told you such) despite the nerf being new.

 

Your second time asking was 3 days after that.

 

1 month after the ban I asked for opinions on garchomp post nerf since we had some new data to go on.

 

Posted
1 minute ago, Munya said:

After looking further, I did deny you once, 10 days after the sand veil nerf, but would have allowed it had you had other TC members support(and told you such) despite the nerf being new.

 

Your second time asking was 3 days after that.

 

1 month after the ban I asked for opinions on garchomp post nerf since we had some new data to go on.

 

If you care to look back, keep looking because I asked more than those times.

Posted

You actually didn't, all of your other posts were "Ban garchomp" and then the one time i actually responded to it and asked why, you started talking about LC, all of the other times the tc members at the time would tell you why it shouldn't be.

Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, Munya said:

You actually didn't, all of your other posts were "Ban garchomp" and then the one time i actually responded to it and asked why, you started talking about LC, all of the other times the tc members at the time would tell you why it shouldn't be.

I asked multiples times for a discussion thread. MULTIPLE TIMES!!! I know what I said and I do not need your approval since you have access to the TC chat and I no longer do. You denied me the right to open a Garchomp thread so many times that I had to make a 2k words post instead: 

 

Garchomp needed to be banned and you did everything in your power (you even had the audacity to VOTE as supposedly a tie breaker) for that to not happen. Eight months of OU were ruined because of you and your agenda of keeping things from UBERS. I don't care if you agree with this or not, the past is the past and you're not going to change my mind. There is no point of arguing about the past with you because i) you have the authority ii) everything you do and say is hidden. I know what I know and you know what you know. No one cares about all of this.

 

All I see is that the only reason there is no Dugtrio thread today is because of you. I know that because TC members have already expressed that they wanted Dugtrio to be discussed in OU. They have said so for months now and some even before Dugtrio was buffed. Here is the most recent example I can think of:

 

Please stop stalling with these bureaucratic excuses and open the discussion thread. 

 

 

Edited by gbwead
Posted

That post was again, 2 weeks(not even) after the nerf to sand veil, it falls into the special case category. Matter of fact you made the post 2-3 days after I denied it for being one of those special cases unless you got the support of other TC members.

 

Huar joined TC last month, Dugtrio thread got made last month.

 

I really have a hard time giving you the time of day at this point considering your "you voted just to prevent this or that", I don't even like voting, thats why we purposely put in a rule to remove the possibility of a tie vote existing so that I never have to again.  This will be my last response on the matter, either convince a TC member to get a thread going or don't that is up to you.

  • 3 weeks later...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.