i ran out of time to respond to this before the thread closed for the first time, but i want to address it now because i still have concerns about it.
the claim about people getting away with not considering dugtrio in their building also is absurd. that pokemon has been standard on sun since before i started playing the tier in spring of 2013. it's not like a player with a good record in, say, last wcop, classic, or even smogon tour 22 would have no idea what effect dugtrio has on the tier. i don't even think players from 2017 are old enough to be considered "legacy players," too. 2017 was only four and a half months ago. just because dugtrio rose in usage for a few months and people started spamming it with cresselia doesn't mean a player who did well in 2017 would have no idea of the ramifications of dugtrio's continued presence in bw ou. if you didn't prep for it in 2017, or 2016, or 2015, etc...you were still going to lose to it and whatever sun abuser it was paired with just the same. the council could've reached back further and considered a broader pool of eligible voters even if it only wanted to restrict this to strong players in trophy-bearing tours.
lastly,
assuming that:
1) pre-suspect discussion threads create a toxic environment, fostering "a false pretense of [democracy]" and determining argument winners via "posting attrition"
2) pre-suspect discussion is sought after, because the bw ou council cares about the opinions of bw ou players when proposing tiering decisions
3) the bw ou council has a responsibility to include more of the player base in its tiering decisions,
it makes sense to give players the discretion to sign up for a private venue to voice their opinion. there shouldn't be concerns about activity with this — after all, a player would need a fair level of engagement already to voluntarily sign up for something like this.
i'm unsure as to what you mean by "playing the tier in an official smogon capacity." do i not play "the tier in an official Smogon capacity" when i play roa tours? what about oupl, or any other tour that doesn't bear a trophy? smogon endorses their existence and they're hosted on the site — they seem to be officially on smogon to me. you could say "those playing the tier in an official Smogon capacity" are people playing in trophy-bearing tours, but then what made the pre-2014 bw ou ladder fall under the same definition of "official?" smogon has plenty of tours featuring bw ou that don't yield trophies. what makes doing well in one of those any less valid for getting reqs than scoring 15 points in smogon tour or going positive over 3 spl games? that is, assuming your primary criteria for who gets to vote is activity, like you allude to later in your post.On voter pool:
First of all, the intent behind these votes has always been to cater to those playing the tier in an official Smogon capacity.
also consider that giving players the opportunity to earn reqs through either suspect ladders or tours wasn't a bad system. it helped ensure that tier changes reflected the desires of a larger portion of the player base. it gave people more chances to qualify for reqs. it gave people who couldn't play official tours a chance. when the ladder stopped being active, why did the people in charge of old gens tiering see no need to replace it with a different way to help more bw players earn reqs? i understand that a bw circuit is ostensibly in the works, but i still don't think that'll be enough even if/when it does someday exist.When BW was the current gen, this included both the ladder and official tournaments; in the absence of an active ladder, it's now only tournaments.
"constant fluctuation of the metagame?" i feel like you're really exaggerating how much bw ou has changed in the last year, or even the last four. sand swapped around some of its filler slots but stayed largely the same. dragmag that existed almost half a decade ago still sees use in similar or identical forms. rain offense and balance have enjoyed the same general framework for years, too. if anything, the most notable metagame shifts result from the bw ou council's recurrent desire to tool with the tier. obviously sand started needing excadrill checks, rain started running excadrill, and sun underwent drastic structural changes as a result of the chlorophyll ban. did any of these shifts create a "constant fluctuation of the metagame," though? i don't think so. a player doesn't need to have been active during last spl or smogon tour to have a solid understanding of the way bw ou works.The decision to limit qualifications to the most recent two tournament phases was motivated by the constant fluctuation of the metagame. The SPL metagame now is much different than from last year; I guarantee you that many players got away without considering Dugtrio in their teambuilding.
the claim about people getting away with not considering dugtrio in their building also is absurd. that pokemon has been standard on sun since before i started playing the tier in spring of 2013. it's not like a player with a good record in, say, last wcop, classic, or even smogon tour 22 would have no idea what effect dugtrio has on the tier. i don't even think players from 2017 are old enough to be considered "legacy players," too. 2017 was only four and a half months ago. just because dugtrio rose in usage for a few months and people started spamming it with cresselia doesn't mean a player who did well in 2017 would have no idea of the ramifications of dugtrio's continued presence in bw ou. if you didn't prep for it in 2017, or 2016, or 2015, etc...you were still going to lose to it and whatever sun abuser it was paired with just the same. the council could've reached back further and considered a broader pool of eligible voters even if it only wanted to restrict this to strong players in trophy-bearing tours.
this part particularly bothers me, because this is one of the most subjective systems for voting requirements i have ever seen. what made the criteria for who was eligible to vote even remotely objective? what about the threshold for a majority you used? how about the decision to post this thread without a discussion thread on the explicit possibility of a dugtrio ban first? does your argument against pre-suspect threads have anything but claims of value? you describe the concept of the pre-suspect discussion thread asIn any case, subjectively judging criteria is something we deliberately sought to reduce by adopting this system.
but this is nothing more than a series of opinions ("overly" subjective, "excessively" influenced, "policy theater," etc). i understand that making suspect tests entirely objective isn't possible. however, this test could've gone to much greater lengths to at least approach objectivity.unstructured, overly subjective, and excessively influenced by posting attrition and policy theater. It wasn't actually a democratic process, only the false pretense of one, and I'm not sorry to see it go.
here's another problem with the quality of voting criteria. a lot of people cannot reasonably accrue 15 points in smogon tour, and that says nothing holistically about their active engagement with the tier and capacity to cast an educated vote. in my case, i almost always have weekend plans, and i shouldn't have to choose between real life priorities and smogon tour if i want to qualify for reqs. there's also the players around the world who live in timezones that make it too inconvenient for them to play smogon tour.Regarding tournament selection: right now, we draw from a mix of exclusive, selection-based tournaments (WCoP and SPL) and general non-selection tournaments (Tour x2, Classic), with at least one of each per phase, meaning that people who opt to manage or play different tiers in SPL/WCoP can still participate through general entry in Tour.
lastly,
a bit later in this paragraph you call the use of spl and smogon tour as opportunities to qualify for reqs "well-precedented." it isn't. the only precedent for retroactively voting on any pokemon in this tier was the excadrill fiasco. before finch announced on december 1st that a bw ou council would be formed, two and a half years after bw ou's last tier change, i kind of assumed bw, like other old gens, was more or less done significantly altering its metagame. there was no clear indicator that season 23 of smogon tour would later be used to determine voter eligibility for a suspect vote (particularly on dugtrio), because there was no indication that there would be another suspect vote. that's another reason why it wasn't fair to shorten some of the list of possible voters to those who played in smogon tour.On forewarning and qualification opportunities:
No old generation suspect test has ever notified its playerbase in advance of the requirements for voting. In every case, the suspect was decided, and the voters drawn from past BW tournaments. This was the case when we voted on Excadrill a few months ago; the only thing that has changed is the period from which we are drawing voters.
however, i think the transparency publishing the methods of qualification in advance could create would be a good thing. i do wonder, though — is there a valid reason to restrict exit surveys to only people who qualify to vote through tour performance? why not automatically include those people, but also grant everyone else the ability to sign up to receive them also?Assuming we stick with this system, this is actually the only vote that won't have its methods of qualification published well in advance; it is now explicitly clear that performance in any official BW tournament will earn the right to participation in an exit survey and potential vote in the suspect period immediately following, and a vote in the suspect period following that.
assuming that:
1) pre-suspect discussion threads create a toxic environment, fostering "a false pretense of [democracy]" and determining argument winners via "posting attrition"
2) pre-suspect discussion is sought after, because the bw ou council cares about the opinions of bw ou players when proposing tiering decisions
3) the bw ou council has a responsibility to include more of the player base in its tiering decisions,
it makes sense to give players the discretion to sign up for a private venue to voice their opinion. there shouldn't be concerns about activity with this — after all, a player would need a fair level of engagement already to voluntarily sign up for something like this.