What are the alternatives to a council? Not a rhetorical question, by the way, I'm genuinely curious what other solutions for tiering policy you might have besides a council.
We've had suspect processes around for a while, and there's no reason we can't have ladders to determine who is eligible for votes on policy. There's just no reason this couldn't have been put up to a ladder vote, but that's hardly the worst problem with the ban lol
The fact of the matter is Sleep is banned, get over it. We’ll see in the coming months if this will have a negative impact on the tier, and IF it does then we can reopen the Sleep dialogue. Until then just be nice, and move on it’s just a game.
There isn't going to be an impact on the metagame because almost no one was using Sleep to start with. There's no data right now to suggest Sleep is suddenly problematic. In fact, the pro-Ban camp has repeatedly tried to push stats discussion out of the conversation because the stats don't support their arguments at all. We're going off of (at most) a month of gameplay with an entire week of usage cut out of the next month's stats. The only real impact is that Darkrai lost its second best set. The real issues here for me are what this means for policy going forward, seeing as apparently we're
1) committing to policy changes to ban an entire mechanic over banning iron valiant and darkrai
2) completely changing how we understand uncompetitiveness
3) completely changing the limits we placed on fidelity towards simulating the cartridges
4) not implementing
any of this to past metagames
So now we're stuck with two different understandings of uncompetitiveness in policy, one that's established in 2024 and one that's been established prior to 2024, and now we're stuck with like 3 interpretations of how we understand fidelity to the cartridges lmao. Generation 1, Generation 9, and everything between all have their own interpretations of how we approach simulating the games. These are supposed to be universally applied principles and restricting them to generations just makes these terms arbitrarily defined.
the fact of the matter is that no argument to keep sleep clause mod was grounded in policy, ever. literally none of them. not a single one. some people seem either unable or unwilling to understand that "no modding" is rule number one of the policy. you cannot support sleep clause mod and honestly claim to be following policy. the only question is "is breaking the rules worth it", to which the answer, at least this gen, is "no"
"you
cannot support policy implemented since the mid-2000s and honestly claim to be following policy"
I'm also bewildered that people supporting the ban on the basis of maintaining fidelity with the cartridges are perfectly fine with not expanding this to past metagames. That you're fine with it just makes your statement about following policy even more ridiculous.