[OU Discussion] Snorlax [Test banned]

[Rigamorty]

50 minutes ago, Bilburt said:

adding two new members who got to vote who were obviously against the ban

I'd really like to know why people keep assuming where I stand on the matter when I hardly know myself.

[Bilburt]

5 minutes ago, Rigamorty said:

I'd really like to know why people keep assuming where I stand on the matter when I hardly know myself.

 

58 minutes ago, Bilburt said:

(Feel free to correct me if this is not the case)

Kty

[pachima]

Still looking for a legit explanation why is kanga banned from UU and snorlax isnt from OU.

[Draekyn]

On 04/10/2016 at 4:24 PM, Bilburt said:

Again I will note that some people in TC have tendecies to ban/unban for themselves rather than representing the community that has their preffered meta (not stall)

Evidence of this please

[Sashaolin]

I didn't read everything and what I'm going to say is off-topic but well, everyone is off-topic right now...
I feel that the TC, even if they are volunteers and thanks to them for spending their time for the community, is a non-democratic instance.
In my opinion, each member of the TC must be elected by the community or at least by the competitive community.
I guess that if it was the case, the decisions they are taking would not be criticized like it is right now.

 

[Rigamorty]

2 minutes ago, Sashaolin said:

I didn't read everything and what I'm going to say is off-topic but well, everyone is off-topic right now...
I feel that the TC, even if they are volunteers and thanks to them for spending their time for the community, is a non-democratic instance.
In my opinion, each member of the TC must be elected by the community or at least by the competitive community.
I guess that if it was the case, the decisions they are taking would not be criticized like it is right now.

The thing about voting is the community still ends up torn. If the vote gets split and some people don't get the person they wanted on council, then they have just as much if not more contempt for the people on the council than there is now. Not to mention people could vote in someone incompetent, whether it be unintentional, or on purpose as a joke, because I wouldn't put that past us. 

[Draekyn]

On 04/10/2016 at 5:57 PM, Rigamorty said:

or on purpose as a joke, because I wouldn't put that past us. 

Next council would be Spiderman, Daryl, no u and a plethora of memers

Though it sure would be interesting to vote for the TC members as long as that vote is properly regulated

[Sashaolin]

3 minutes ago, Rigamorty said:

The thing about voting is the community still ends up torn. If the vote gets split and some people don't get the person they wanted on council, then they have just as much if not more contempt for the people on the council than there is now. Not to mention people could vote in someone incompetent, whether it be unintentional, or on purpose as a joke, because I wouldn't put that past us. 

The TC decisions are made by a group, not only one person. Some people will always find reasons to not agree but don't deny all those who would be satisfied.

People could vote for someone incompetent as much as the one who actually recruit TC members, that's not an argument.

[Thunderprime]

Just saying real fast: I never had as much trouble dealing with kangaskan than I do with snorlax right now. While kanghaskan got banned for similar reason we discusss snorlax right now and they are equivalent in the usage.

[Bilburt]

55 minutes ago, Draekyn said:

Evidence of this please

Do you really need me to name the person im referring to?

[Draekyn]

On 04/10/2016 at 6:43 PM, Bilburt said:

Do you really need me to name the person im referring to?

yes, with evidence

[Senile]

Alright this is pretty ridiculous, I don't know where you guys are getting these accusations of the new members being biased. Since I'm not completely braindead, I decided to comb the entire thread for all of Riga and Coolio's posts, to see what their public stance seems to be. Here are riga's two posts:

This one is pretty innocuous, pointing out the absurdity of of a Para from body slam proccing a bunch in a row.

This one, if anything, seems to be acknowledging how incredibly good Snorlax is. The most you could pull from this is "yeah, Snorlax is probably op, but idk if should it be banned?"; This is about as far from "Anti-Snorlax Ban Bias" as you can get. If anything, this post seems pretty reasonable, all things considered.

 

yes i'm ignoring "bring back gengar/tyranitar", since i consider it a joke lmao

 

So, obviously this argument fails. If anything, I wouldn't be surprised if Riga abstained from voting, and the reason Tyrone specified that the majority didn't vote for ban is that it ended up being 3 Ban, 3 no ban, and 1 abstain. But, I mean, this is just my speculation.

 

So, what about Coolio's stance? Well, he actually made quite a few posts so I'm not gonna bother linking them. Does he think Snorlax should stay in OU? Looking at the posts, it seems pretty likely that yes, he does. How does that make him biased? He's provided reasoning throughout the thread as to why he thinks Snorlax should stay, and argued with people to legitimize his points. There doesn't seem to be any sort of bias or anything, it's just that he happens to have any opinion that the people calling him biased disagree with. It's one thing to disagree with the lack of a ban or to disagree with the points he made, (I don't like them too much personally), but calling him biased doesn't make sense.

 

So, is Tyrone biased for selecting Rigamorty and Coolio? lmao no. If he was intentionally picking people to oppose the ban, he definitely could have picked someone "more biased" (or whatever the fuck you guys are even trying to say) than Rigamorty, and Coolio having an opinion you disagree with doesn't make him biased. Call me crazy, but I get the feeling that Tyrone isn't personally scheming to setup the entire OU tier behind the scenes for some convoluted reasoning nobody knows about.

 

So, why don't we vote for council members? I mean, it's been explained repeatedly for the past ~3 years every time a controversial decision is made by the tier council, but I guess repeating the reasons again won't hurt, so let me outline it:
 

- Effectively turns it into a popularity contest.

- Doesn't necessarily guarantee a good candidate actually ends up on the council.

- No matter how the vote is handled, the people who are allowed to vote is definitely going to be restricted in some way to prevent the system getting abused. Because of this, even if we do vote council members, the complaint will just shift from "we should vote" to "the rules on who's allowed to vote isn't fair, what's the point of a vote!"; Sure, you might get less people complaining than before, but I find it amusing that the people who want a vote for council members are even assuming that they'll even be allowed to participate in the vote.

- Staff don't like it. Specifically Squirtle has denied this idea like a million times. This alone makes the entire idea not even worth considering, but even beyond Squirtle, I'm pretty confident other staff members don't like it. The tier council gives members information that they can't leak to people, and the staff want people who are trustworthy on it.

- god damn fucking why even do you guys want a "democracy" so much jesus it's pokemon online not a god damn country we're not dictating your taxes lksghdlfns

 

Also, all these constant vague accusations of tier council members of maybe doing some things for personal gain with no backing or reasoning is pretty kek. What's the point of even sliding that in there? Just to try and undermine the credibility of the council, while making sure that what you're saying is vague enough that it won't be deleted for "personal attacks" and can't be disproven? The burden of proof is on you uguus, don't try to poison the punch bowl in an attempt get people who don't question what you're saying to actually believe your nonsense.

 

tl;dr: Riga isn't biased y'all high, Coolio isn't biased he just disagrees with you, Tyrone isn't the head of a conspiracy, voting for the council is dumb, stop accusing people of your made up thought crimes and this thread has gotten stupidly derailed for no reason.

[Thunderprime]

10 minutes ago, Senile said:

Alright this is pretty ridiculous, I don't know where you guys are getting these accusations of the new members being biased. Since I'm not completely braindead, I decided to comb the entire thread for all of Riga and Coolio's posts, to see what their public stance seems to be. Here are riga's two posts:

This one is pretty innocuous, pointing out the absurdity of of a Para from body slam proccing a bunch in a row.

This one, if anything, seems to be acknowledging how incredibly good Snorlax is. The most you could pull from this is "yeah, Snorlax is probably op, but idk if should it be banned?"; This is about as far from "Anti-Snorlax Ban Bias" as you can get. If anything, this post seems pretty reasonable, all things considered.

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

yes i'm ignoring "bring back gengar/tyranitar", since i consider it a joke lmao

 

 

So, obviously this argument fails. If anything, I wouldn't be surprised if Riga abstained from voting, and the reason Tyrone specified that the majority didn't vote for ban is that it ended up being 3 Ban, 3 no ban, and 1 abstain. But, I mean, this is just my speculation.

 

So, what about Coolio's stance? Well, he actually made quite a few posts so I'm not gonna bother linking them. Does he think Snorlax should stay in OU? Looking at the posts, it seems pretty likely that yes, he does. How does that make him biased? He's provided reasoning throughout the thread as to why he thinks Snorlax should stay, and argued with people to legitimize his points. There doesn't seem to be any sort of bias or anything, it's just that he happens to have any opinion that the people calling him biased disagree with. It's one thing to disagree with the lack of a ban or to disagree with the points he made, (I don't like them too much personally), but calling him biased doesn't make sense.

 

So, is Tyrone biased for selecting Rigamorty and Coolio? lmao no. If he was intentionally picking people to oppose the ban, he definitely could have picked someone "more biased" (or whatever the fuck you guys are even trying to say) than Rigamorty, and Coolio having an opinion you disagree with doesn't make him biased. Call me crazy, but I get the feeling that Tyrone isn't personally scheming to setup the entire OU tier behind the scenes for some convoluted reasoning nobody knows about.

 

So, why don't we vote for council members? I mean, it's been explained repeatedly for the past ~3 years every time a controversial decision is made by the tier council, but I guess repeating the reasons again won't hurt, so let me outline it:
 

- Effectively turns it into a popularity contest.

- Doesn't necessarily guarantee a good candidate actually ends up on the council.

- No matter how the vote is handled, the people who are allowed to vote is definitely going to be restricted in some way to prevent the system getting abused. Because of this, even if we do vote council members, the complaint will just shift from "we should vote" to "the rules on who's allowed to vote isn't fair, what's the point of a vote!"; Sure, you might get less people complaining than before, but I find it amusing that the people who want a vote for council members are even assuming that they'll even be allowed to participate in the vote.

- Staff don't like it. Specifically Squirtle has denied this idea like a million times. This alone makes the entire idea not even worth considering, but even beyond Squirtle, I'm pretty confident other staff members don't like it. The tier council gives members information that they can't leak to people, and the staff want people who are trustworthy on it.

- god damn fucking why even do you guys want a "democracy" so much jesus it's pokemon online not a god damn country we're not dictating your taxes lksghdlfns

 

Also, all these constant vague accusations of tier council members of maybe doing some things for personal gain with no backing or reasoning is pretty kek. What's the point of even sliding that in there? Just to try and undermine the credibility of the council, while making sure that what you're saying is vague enough that it won't be deleted for "personal attacks" and can't be disproven? The burden of proof is on you uguus, don't try to poison the punch bowl in an attempt get people who don't question what you're saying to actually believe your nonsense.

 

tl;dr: Riga isn't biased y'all high, Coolio isn't biased he just disagrees with you, Tyrone isn't the head of a conspiracy, voting for the council is dumb, stop accusing people of your made up thought crimes and this thread has gotten stupidly derailed for no reason.

All this quote for one thing: tier council members are not chosen to "abstain" wth

[Senile]

1 minute ago, Thunderprime said:

All this quote for one thing: tier council members are not chosen to "abstain" wth

idk how to tell you this, but there's nothing wrong with abstaining. There are 7 tier council members, and they're expected to make decisions on every tier, even though I'm sure a lot of them don't have much experience in certain tiers, either because they don't like them or play them or whatever; Naturally, since they're tier council members, I'm sure they look into any concerns of the tier even if they don't know much about it because hey, it's their job, but even then they might just not be confident in their ability to make a good decision. If they don't think they can provide a meaningful, well-informed vote on a specific pokemon, why should they be forced to vote? It doesn't make sense. Pretty much any system that operates through a majority vote like this has an abstain option for this reason. That's also why we have 7 council members; If we had like 3 or 4, then abstaining would be a much bigger deal, since even 1 abstain is a huge portion of the council effectively not making a decision. However, with 7 members, even if 2 people abstain, 5 votes should be plenty to make a decent decision.

 

Besides, abstain doesn't even necessarily mean that they're throwing their vote away, it could just mean "for now, I can't say for certain either way, so I'll think about it and give a vote later"; Keep in mind, there's a reason this thread is currently open and not locked and archived, and that reason is that although they have for now decided to not ban Snorlax, it doesn't necessarily mean that it's their final decision.

[Thunderprime]

Meh in my opinion 7 is not that much, plus if one abstain and it happens the vote is tied thats no use at all. Maby some of them have voted yet OU aint their tier or worse they dont even play OU. No offense but your "job" is to make a decision and if you are not qualified to do so another should take the responsability.

[pachima]

I still didnt understand why arent member polls viable? 

Someone enlight me?

[Sashaolin]

31 minutes ago, Senile said:

- Effectively turns it into a popularity contest.

That's an assumption, don't say it like if you had already done it. 

With anonymous votes, people still have the right to vote for the person they judge appropriate rather than their friends.

In the end, I prefer a fair popularity contest than the actual method.

 

26 minutes ago, Senile said:

- Doesn't necessarily guarantee a good candidate actually ends up on the council.

The same meaningless argument than Rigamorty like if the actual method guarantees a good candidate ending up on the council.

The candidates could be selected as potentially good council member by the staff with criteria such as activity, knowledges, successes, ... before the votes.

 

26 minutes ago, Senile said:

- No matter how the vote is handled, the people who are allowed to vote is definitely going to be restricted in some way to prevent the system getting abused. Because of this, even if we do vote council members, the complaint will just shift from "we should vote" to "the rules on who's allowed to vote isn't fair, what's the point of a vote!"; Sure, you might get less people complaining than before, but I find it amusing that the people who want a vote for council members are even assuming that they'll even be allowed to participate in the vote.

"We don't want to change our tyrannic methods because even if we can do something more fair, people still complain" is not an argument.

 

26 minutes ago, Senile said:

- Staff don't like it. Specifically Squirtle has denied this idea like a million times. This alone makes the entire idea not even worth considering, but even beyond Squirtle, I'm pretty confident other staff members don't like it. The tier council gives members information that they can't leak to people, and the staff want people who are trustworthy on it.

- god damn fucking why even do you guys want a "democracy" so much jesus it's pokemon online not a god damn country we're not dictating your taxes lksghdlfns

This one is the funniest one, I guess I will not answer to it because of the Godwin point, you know...

[Spaintakula]

18 minutes ago, Sashaolin said:

That's an assumption, don't say it like if you had already done it. 

With anonymous votes, people still have the right to vote for the person they judge appropriate rather than their friends.

Why would people approve an anonymous vote if the main reasoning for it is for some individuals to vote properly because otherwise their friend's feelings get hurt cuz hurr durr you didn't vote for me.

18 minutes ago, Sashaolin said:

"We don't want to change our tyrannic methods because even if we can do something more fair, people still complain" is not an argument.

People will always complain, it doesn't need to be an argument, it's a fact. Nothing is 100%, not here, not anywhere, so that is as good as "make it anonymous because people will be able to safely vote without hurting their buddy's feelings"

[codylramey]

Oh nice, i get to continue to have a life \O/

[Sashaolin]

20 minutes ago, Spaintakula said:

Why would people approve an anonymous vote if the main reasoning for it is for some individuals to vote properly because otherwise their friend's feelings get hurt cuz hurr durr you didn't vote for me.

Why not ?

Because it's more fair, it doesn't mean it's perfectly fair.

That's how they do it for the Snorlax/Blissey ban vote.

 

20 minutes ago, Spaintakula said:

People will always complain, it doesn't need to be an argument, it's a fact.

Exactly what I said, it's a meaningless argument because it's a fact.

This "people still complain" argument is like saying "Stop enhance security because people will always find ways to defraud"...

 

20 minutes ago, Spaintakula said:

Nothing is 100%, not here, not anywhere

That's why I said : "In the end, I prefer a fair popularity contest than the actual method".

It's not me but Senile who must understand this.

 

20 minutes ago, Spaintakula said:

so that is as good as "make it anonymous because people will be able to safely vote without hurting their buddy's feelings"

I never said this... And I know that it will not lead to a perfectly fair vote.

So, comparing the "people still complain" fact and the whim you created above is just impossible.

[Draekyn]

On 04/10/2016 at 9:42 PM, Sashaolin said:

That's how they do it for the Snorlax/Blissey ban vote.

Not exactly how that happened, the community vote was 1 vote out of 3, and there was a screening process to select eligible voters

[Mike]

9 hours ago, Hotarubi said:

I'd rather deal with a chansey any day of the week for a year straight every day even.

Chansey is nowhere near the problem that snorlax is.

I never really said it was a problem, it's moreso people complain about it being an uguu. Spamming wish/protect and having an insane amount of HP is annoying for most people. I wasn't really talking about myself, I was just referring to the general response I have personally gotten when I have seen someone use Chansey. Chansey is in my eyes not that hard to deal with, but it's just really fat haha. Chansey defines a cleric.

 

9 hours ago, Hotarubi said:

In regards to your mention of trapinch, if trapinch dispaches snorlax the player is forces to swap giving the opponent the ability to setup a pokemon this is also very unsporting. Having to use a pokemon like trapinch to kill snorlax specifically is centralizing which is unhealthy for the OU meta.

To be fair you do have a point there. But still preparing for a common pokemon in a tier isn't weird at all. If Snorlax is a threat to you, you try to counter it and trapinch works for some people. On top of that it also traps Chansey and a CB priority move isn't useless either.  Also you mention you must be forced to switch out after you have killed Snorlax. People do this all the time in every battle, sacing pokemon to let another pokemon set up. If anything this just shows you are prepared if you do get trapped. 

 

9 hours ago, Hotarubi said:

Other pokemon counter chansey just fine and also umbreon, for example VENU however venu generally doesn't do very much against snorlax unless you've built some gimmick specifically to counter snorlax.

I am not really sure you meant by this so I am just going to assume something, correct me if I am wrong. I am thinking you mean Venusaur does well vs Chansey and Umbreon? First of all where did Umbreon come from? Also this is a Snorlax discussion and I just brought up Chansey because this will be the main special wall in OU if Lax gets the boot. Anyway yeah Venusaur does well against them but not so well vs Snorlax. Even then Venusaur can use leech seed on the switch and kinda cripple Snorlax and force it more to switch out. Because of his HP leech seed does give back alot of HP. Giving physical attackers more of an opening to switch in on Snorlax. This also counts for Ludicolo. 

 

9 hours ago, Hotarubi said:

Snorlax gives an unfair advantage in most situations.

The is the OU tier not the Snorlax Tier.

I mean Dugtrio is what gave teams an unfair advantage. Revenge killing everything that was slower than it/low enough. That is uncompetitive. Snorlax does have alot opportunities to switch in on stuff but you can predict Snorlax switching in. Since most of the time it is quite obvious. It's offensive pressure is pretty high aswell but again you can play around that. Also calling OU the Snorlax tier is kind of redicilous. There always have been better performing pokemon in every tier. I mean take a look at the viablity threads. Every tier has S+ pokemon. These are really good in the tier. But just because they are good doesn't mean you need to ban them. Then you might aswell say that UU is the Altaria tier. NU the Poliwrath tier. But there are enough ways to work around Snorlax and now that I have played alot more OU I can safely say Snorlax isn't that hard to beat.

 

9 hours ago, Hotarubi said:

Maybe you will understand once this becomes a stale thing for you also, I got tired of this pokemon in 2014.

Maybe you will understand once you get a brain that people got tired of you the moment you started playing.

[Sashaolin]

4 hours ago, Draekyn said:

Not exactly how that happened, the community vote was 1 vote out of 3, and there was a screening process to select eligible voters

I know that but we were speaking about anonymous votes, nothing to do with what you just said...

[DoubleJ]

No offense to the people still posting here, but can I propose that this thread be closed?

 

@Tyrone

 

Further discussion on the matter of the TC and how the TC works should be held in a new comp alley thread. 

[Hotarubi]

8 hours ago, DoubleJ said:

No offense to the people still posting here, but can I propose that this thread be closed?

 

@Tyrone

 

Further discussion on the matter of the TC and how the TC works should be held in a new comp alley thread. 

Request that it isn't closed on grounds that I would still like to see discussion regarding if we will actually end up keeping snorlax in the tier or not.

Simple and modest request.

Since for now was the closing statement in keeping it.