Quote from Daemion »I care little about admin drama, so I am just happy that mtgsalvation continues
There really isn't as much drama as you would like.
"Hey we are closing the site for X and Y reasons on such and such date."
"That sucks, can we try to save it in any way?"
"No, our minds are made up."
"Well crap. Ok, we are going to build a new site because we love what we were doing and the community that we built."
"Ok cool. Good luck with that."
"Oh hey someone is buying the site and it's remaining open."
"Ok, we are still continuing with what we started."
"Yeah we figured, good luck."
I think Josh made good points in his podcast yesterday. There's definitely room for "oops we made a mistake", but most of the cards that you'd run alongside it are margin9on their own, and if you're tutoring for that combo there are plenty of combos you can tutor for. The legendary creatures is going to be the biggest litmus test.
Ok, thanks. That was the only mystery left of their meetings that I was unsure of.
Please don't.
===============================
Hey Charlotte, I don't feel like repeating myself, but my thoughts on the updated philosophy are here in case you want feedback.
If we take them at their word (and honestly, if we can't then discussing or even worrying about the RC is pointless), the process is democratic with each member of the RC (not CAG) giving a -2 to +2 vote. -2 or +2 means they feel strongly about their position, -1 or +1 is they want the change but aren't pushing hard for it, and 0 is indifferent to it. And I guess there is some total score threshold, but honestly not sure what that is.
My FAQ has the updated (before today) philosophy document that you can quote.
It must be how I charmed Sheldon and Scott at Roanoke. I was hoping to make it to gencon but that's not happening. Really wanted a chance to meet you as well.
On topic, A+ announcement, mad if the CAG had as much influence as I suspect, they should all get a pat on the back as well.
They go hand in hand, because "spirit of the format" means different things to different people, but "takes the game away from other players" is pretty east to grok.
Case in point, I already (jokingly) asked if I can start asking to unban Library again since you all removed PBtEx and he pointed me to the 4th bullet about Problematic cards. Well i took that combined with the rest of the philosophy document to be more applicable to cards like Cyclonic Rift than Library.
I don't disagree that the old list causes headaches and rules lawyering, but humans crave direction. And as your best source for feedback, the enfranchised players that read and digest this document are better served if we have that baseline.
Some time today, they don't really have a set time. I've seen it after 11am, and just after midnight.
I've brought it up already, which is unfortunately the best answer I can give right now.
As long as they ban all the cards I lose to I'll be happy.
It's not entirely outside the realm of possibility that this happens. They could be taking baby steps with the CAG: introduce them, formalize their charter, solidify their vision and philosophy, and THEN start banning and/or unbanning things and making rules changes.
Was it the less optional choice?