np: UU - Can't Touch This

[Erazor]

I'd written most of my Frosslass paragraph, but I feel that without the February usage statistics being posted to my knowledge, that my argument about how the metagame has trended towards Anti-Lass leads that do nothing but prevent Spikes set up is a testament to how broken it is. I guess I'll abstain from voting then at this point in time, as the rest of my argument doesn't hold up quite as well without said statistics.

Lass wasn't even a suspect :(

 

[Rolf]

I have a couple of ideas on how to streamline the system...

One week before the testing period ends, ask people to make an "Individual Discussion Thread" regarding the Pokemon they believe are suspects. Close the threads which don't have enough substance to go on (if someone nominates Venusaur with the justification that "sleep powder is broken" or something). Let discussion occur, and if the discussion seems to suggest that the Pokemon in question isn't much of a suspect, then that Pokemon is not nominated. If the discussion is contentious, then the Pokemon probably is a suspect. At this point, go through the thread, pick out the people who made the most valid arguments for/against the suspect, and give them voting rights.

The advantage of this system is that it hides the nomination process and the voter paragraph process behind the general discussion and debate about a suspect Pokemon that goes on anyway, so it's much more seamless, less time consuming, and more "natural". The disadvantage is that it's much more subjective, and would probably involve more work on the part of the mods in charge of it.

This idea actually really appeals to me. If we can concise C&C, we can concise voting.

1) Rather than having the discussion on a big thread like this where the topic is prone just to wander to different subjects (I guess it's supposed to) but it overall makes the discussion on the suspects much less in-depth. Threads like the Froslass thread are a great example on how the "suspect threads" would look like. They keep the talk very general and never wanders. This makes a great foundation for a discussion rather than one big thread like this.

2) A week of discussion before voting allows points to be made strong enough to be included in paragraphs, and there's grounds for people to actually voice their opinion; the more you discuss in the thread the less you have to actually write come voting time. The base for each paragraph is in the discussion threads for you! You just have to qualify (I believe that's the right use of the word) the statements.

3) It keeps things public. One advantage to this is that we get everyone's opinion, even if it is a little slated. The next advantage, and possibly even larger, is just in the general argument. Rather than keeping your opinion and reasons for private you post them for everyone to see, where they will be critiqued to a greater extent than they ever were before. I had an experience like this yesterday in irc. Me and Heysup were discussing Cresselia and our differing opinions. Just in the short 15 minutes or so that we were both on irc, I had already found at least another five points of evidence I could have used in my Cresselia paragraph. I don't know about Heysup, but I'm sure he found some new points of evidence for his argument also. Discussion is breeding grounds for thought, and public threads always focused on one thing make a great foundation.

There is something I think is wrong though. There must be some way that someone can think of to take the idea of making public discussion threads for each suspect a week before voting while not being subjective on who gets to vote. I personally would just stick with the rating / deviation requirements needed to vote.

 

[capefeather]

I'm also all for shortening the testing periods, especially in light of the incoming fifth generation. The upper reqs would be interesting, too. I wonder why the OU Suspect process stopped using it, even as a private, undisclosed requirement...

 

[Banedon]

I think a shorter test period is fine. As for upper reqs, I think we could have a certain rating beyond which you don't need paragraphs to vote (or if you need it, not a lot of it). Anyone under that rating can still vote, but they'd have to write a good paragraph to prove they know what they're talking about.

I think having also individual Pokemon thread is a good thing, although people should remember to use them instead of writing in this thread lol (see the Moltres discussion a few pages back).

 

[reachzero]

The voter threads are now up and operational! Check to see if you have voting rights, and if so, cast your vote!

For those that haven't done this before, the voter threads are found here:
http://www.smogon.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=82

 

[Flamewheeler]

Damnit all! I actually wrote something on P-z and forgot to submit it....oh well.