Creation of BBR Ruleset Committee; Brawl Nationals Agree to Same Stagelist! New TO's!

[Jack Kieser]

why the emphasis on agreement? ever heard of agree to disagree? I mean I've ridiculed ohio repeatedly for their stage list but I never would have taken steps like this to deny them their right to do it and make AN's stagelist which I prefer the standard "use this or else" ruleset

Why the emphasis on agreement?! Because this is a community! Try imagining a world where the Constitution was a "recommendation", and states could adopt parts of it as they see fit. It'd be chaos. That's what the Federal gov't is for: to provide cohesion by TELLING the states what to do, because the states would, for all intents and purposes, **** themselves over by being selfish if they didn't.

Same concept. The states have a right to not follow federal infrastructure guidelines, such as guidelines for roads and interstates... but the ones that DO get federal funding as a bonus for following the rules. Well, TOs have the right not to follow the national ruleset... but the ones that do get preferential treatment for following the rules.

 

[fkacyan]

That's BS and you know it. I had to pass out flyers for work on Black Friday, giving new customers a discount on services. One lady had the BALLS to tell me that I (personally) was being discriminatory because I was punishing tried-and-true customers by not offering the discount to them.

What you said is JUST AS ******** as what she said to me. If you follow the rules and agree to give a little ground in order to have community ruleset cohesion, you get to use the super-awesome tools, like stickies. If not, you still get to use all of the awesome tools, like having your own thread and having access to thousands of players to advertise to.

You can play semantics all you want, but everything is discriminatory in some way. SWF already "punished" people for not getting to national-level status by not letting THEM get stickies. Oh, but that's not a punishment, and no one would ever insinuate that it was! So, people who comply and adopt the standard ruleset for cohesion's sake get special bonuses that aren't afforded to the children that absolutely HAVE to have a 3 stage starter list or that MUST include every single stage ever.

It's not a hard concept.

It's not bull**** at all.

Current AZ statement: Your tourney WILL NOT be featured if you don't adopt our ruleset.

Better version: We will make sure your tourney is featured in every way possible and we will give it extra promotion in our signatures and blog posts to give it extra attention if you adopt our ruleset

One is an INCENTIVE. The other is a PUNISHMENT. They are two very different things, and trying to equate the difference to 'semantics' is a load of crap.

No one is being punished, what happens to events that don't follow this ruleset which is designed to help the community as a whole? No sticky and no front page coverage on AiB? That's hardly a punishment in the long run, it just means the people who can give those perks prefer to give them to those who also support this. Using the list is an incentive to get those perks, you're acting like the event can't happen if this ruleset isn't used or a thread not using it will be insta locked, relax.

Taking something that used to be universally available and making it exclusive to a particular ruleset doesn't make it a perk.

 

[Jack Kieser]

It's not bull**** at all.

Current AZ statement: Your tourney WILL NOT be featured if you don't adopt our ruleset.

Better version: We will make sure your tourney is featured in every way possible and we will give it extra promotion in our signatures and blog posts to give it extra attention if you adopt our ruleset

One is an INCENTIVE. The other is a PUNISHMENT. They are two very different things, and trying to equate the difference to 'semantics' is a load of crap.



Taking something that used to be universally available and making it exclusive to a particular ruleset doesn't make it a perk.

Current policy: If your tourney isn't a national, it WILL NOT be featured as a sticky.

Do you hear anyone *****ing about THAT? It's the same, isn't it? Face it: you want to apply a double standard because you don't like the concept of national-level TOs having to make concessions for the collective. Stickies are expressly for the most important tournaments. The definition of "most important" used to be "national tournament". AZ, effectively, changed that definition. "most important" now means "national tournament that uses the official ruleset". Boo-freaking-hoo. So, now some people that USED to get preferential treatment don't anymore.

Again, this is a dictatorship, not a democracy. AZ and JV giveth, and they taketh away. It's as simple as that. The tourneys that used to get stickies DIDN'T ACTUALLY DESERVE IT, and so now they don't get them anymore. That's what these TOs get for being children that would rather have their own rules than sacrifice some individuality for the entire community's sake.

**** 'em, in my mind. They can still run their national level tournaments how they want, they just won't be representative of the entire community anymore, which they shouldn't be. SWF should only be promoting tournaments that are representative of the entire site, and TOs that don't adpot the official ruleset aren't representing the community anymore; their representing their regions or, at worst, their selves. So, no sticky for them.

 

[Overswarm]

Oh, christ... this is the most selfish community I've ever seen. It makes me HAPPY that I haven't been posting lately. We have the opportunity to have some REAL cohesion, something that this community has been lacking since January 2008, and the opportunity to come to consensus by being REASONABLE (give and take), and you all have the BALLS to complain about it? Because it's still not 100% what you want?

**** all of you. Every single one of you who is complaining about how it's not the perfect list, about how you didn't get to vote on it, about how it's "imperialistic" or "communist". **** all of you. You should be ashamed of yourselves!

Year after year, the BBR does its best and works its hardest to try to come up with good rulesets and stagelists with the limited knowledge available to it because all of you people are too busy infighting and banning things to get anything done. And every year when they try to implement ANYTHING, you all *****, moan, and complain when its not 100% exactly what you want and throw out all of their hard work. You all ignore the hard work and passion of 80 people who love this game and this community enough to do what they do thanklessly, without pay, and at personal expense, all because you're all selfish.

And when the admins finally take a stand, finally try to do what's right and what's necessary to bring the ****ing community together for once, to make us a REAL community, instead of just some loose collection of people who happen to play the same game, YOU ALL COMPLAIN BECAUSE IT'S NOT 100% WHAT YOU WANTED.

AlphaZealot, why on EARTH are you taking all of this? I can only imagine how much effort it took to get XYRO AND THE AN TOs, of all people, to agree on conceding stages and points in the name of unity, much less bring together two of the premiere Brawl websites in a cohesive way. I can't even guess the political leaps necessary to actually implement something like this. AND TO DO IT AT PERSONAL EXPENSE FOR THE GOOD OF THE COMMUNITY, and still have people *****ing about it... It's deplorable at best, and disgusting at worst.

You all should be ashamed of yourselves, because the way you're all arguing, the way you're all bashing AZ, the way BBR members are butthurt because "they didn't have any say" when they couldn't even bring the community together... This all makes me ASHAMED to say I'm a Brawler.

I don't want to call myself a Brawl TO anymore, because I don't WANT to be a part of a community that's THIS childish, THIS selfish, and THIS petty. We don't deserve AZ, JV, AiB, and the TOs involved in this, and we don't deserve their efforts.

I'm... I'm done. This is ridiculous. You people need to ****ing grow up and start acting like a competitive community.

Yeah, we weren't ever trying to "bring hte community together", because that's not important.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Yeah, we weren't ever trying to "bring hte community together", because that's not important.

Overswarm, I expressly said in that post that you tried, but you failed. The fact that you all were too nice and only made pansy "recommendations" gave the community the room to ignore you, and so we never had cohesion. You did your part, and, again, as I said in that post, you did it nobly and at personal expense for absolutely no thanks.

But you failed. So now, AZ, JV, the admins, and AiB is going to try to succeed where you failed. You tried the carrot; now it's time for the stick. The fact that you're complaining that you "didn't get a say" when you've HAD A SAY FOR 3 YEARS and still didn't get anything done is what makes me mad. Just admit that you failed, take the blame for your part of it, and move on.

 

[KageMurphy]

Taking something that used to be universally available and making it exclusive to a particular ruleset doesn't make it a perk.

And making some modifications to it doesn't make it a punishment. There was already a certain criteria set in place to get a sticky or feature so it was univerally available so long as it met the requirements, this change is no different. It's not a punishment to anyone, period.

 

[SuSa]

ITT we have:

The Brawl Community and The Brawl Collective.

I'm siding with the community.

–noun
1.
something that incites or tends to incite to action or greater effort, as a reward offered for increased productivity.

–noun
1.
the act of punishing.
2.
the fact of being punished, as for an offense or fault.
3.
a penalty inflicted for an offense, fault, etc.
4.
severe handling or treatment.

something that incites or tends to incite to action or greater effort, as a reward offered for increased productivity.

"If I follow this ruleset (the something) - I get to enjoy having my thread stickied (Reward)"

a penalty inflicted for an offense, fault, etc.

"If I don't follow this ruleset (a fault) - I get a penalty of not enjoying a stickied thread (penalty)




Want to argue semantics? It's a matter of viewpoint. I see it as an incentive? Why? Because all they did was change the rules from what they were.

A punishment can be an incentive (think "motive") for doing something.

 

[DaomarIsBear]

It's blowing my mind to see Susa and Jack being pitted against OS and BPC for once. I absolutely adore it.

 

[Jack Kieser]

THANK YOU SUSA. Semantics arguments will get us nowhere in this discussion. Literally nowhere. Because it's all a matter of perspective.

Also: I'm not "against" OS or BPC, in the classical sense. I have an immense respect for both of them, and I know their good guys with good intentions. I'm just more for having a real community for once, instead of a loose confederation of TOs.

 

[SuSa]

I've argued against BPC, Jack, Twinkie, and all of them.

There's 2 sides to SuSa.

Personal.
Objective.

I'm realistic to a degree (nowhere near the amount Omni is... haha...ha..) and thus when I found my personal route was highly improbable for me (more-so than my objective side) I argued for the objective side. I used logical reasoning to try and back up what I wanted. I searched for criteria to ban stages to give conservatives logical backing for their changes.

You really have to know me better and practically stalk my posts to understand this. I'm something called "level headed". Something relatively rare in this biased-as-hell community.

There is what I feel is right. Then what I know is right based on logical reasoning that can be agreeable. My realistic side sides which whatever has the better chance.

Due to AZ's, Havok's, Xyro's, and the other 2's efforts. My personal side now has a shooting chance. A MASSIVE step forward. So why continue arguing for something I don't personally support?

EDIT:

TL;DR
I debate over things to try to make advances. If you don't challenge the status quo, it will never change.

Treat a man as he is, and he will remain as he is. Treat a man as he could be, and he will become what he should be.

 

[DaomarIsBear]

Let me try that again. It's refreshing seeing Susa and Jack post something I actually agree with.

 

[Raziek]

I will say it again.

I am COMPLETELY FINE with attempting to unify the ruleset for national tournaments. This is a worthwhile venture.

However, if you retire the Recommended Ruleset, you've ****ed up big time.

AZ, answer me this. You claim to be "Fine with allowing people to choose", but if you take away the document that says, 'We think these stages are also fine.", you are TAKING AWAY THAT FREEDOM OF CHOICE.
Why would you retire the recommended ruleset? It is FINE to have both documents. The "Nationals ruleset" and the list of other things that are ALSO FINE, but not typically commonplace.

Will most TOs try out stages like Norfair if they aren't on some list? Not a chance. This is a stealth ban, it's brute force, and you still need to take that BBR label off of it.

 

[Xyro77]

Jack, thank you!

Susa/Budget, relax and watch how this goes before you go postal on it/us.. These new rules that we are working on is coming from the TOP tournaments organizers. People who study results and keep track of what stages were pick, why they were picked and what was the outcome. We take feedback from event event and study it. Of all the people on this site, i guarantee you this power is safe with us.


Budget, remember how you obsess about ps2? If you quit posting all this garbage you have been posting(cause its getting annoying/causing un-needed drama) and IM me when you can.....you might like what you may hear from me.





AZ, i brought up the "take bbr off our name" way before this list came out. PLEASE reconsider it. Having bbr on the title is a disgraces to us and what we are doing.

 

[Luxor]

I like how BBR is a dirty word now.

 

[Crow!]

Much of the BBR doesn't want its name associated with this underhanded scheme, and apparently some of its co-conspirators don't want their name associated with the BBR, either. Remove it already.

 

[Xyro77]

I like how BBR is a dirty word now.

Its not. They just dont do what needs to be done. They makes ******** stage lists/rules. Allowing people who dont play smash or run events to vote on very important issues that change the way we play. they ignored PURE indisputable facts(numbers/graphs/charts....ect) about certain issues. So they lost all respect. They should not get the right to decide on certain things anymore.

Thats where we come in.

 

[swordgard]

so basically the bbr is retiring their "recommended" attitude and instead replacing it with a "use-this-or-we-will-come-to-your-house-and-brick-you" attitude.

No. Take notice, this is really not made by the "BBR" that most of the people refer to. Its literally these TOs that decide the ruleset. The BBR which consists of 80+ persons has no influence over this, its only these TOs discretion.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Crow!, you too? If anyone were to give in to hyperbole, I thought it'd never be you. This isn't underhanded, and you know it. How in the world is this underhanded? You don't seem to think the NFL is underhanded, and they work in much the same way, as does any major sport, as does many world governments (see my example of the American road system).

There is nothing underhanded about this. It is heavyhanded, but that is much different and SORELY needed at this point.

 

[Ussi]

I want to say i like that a unified national ruleset was finally made.

 

[Raziek]

Jack, they completely ignored the input of a group of players who are KNOWLEDGEABLE about this kind of thing, in favor of the whims of FIVE TOs. FIVE.

That'd be like if you, SuSa, BPC, Twinkie, and myself all came together, made a ridiculously liberal list, and then said, "HERE'S HOW WE DO."

This is clandestine, and you're a little crazy if you can't see that.

 

[AlphaZealot]

I'll try to get JV to respond to the use of "BBR" in the new "BBR Ruleset Committee". I believe though he views this from the perspective of running Smashboards and the problems that would be caused by two different entities existing, both producing "rulesets".

One problem is this:

Much of the BBR doesn't want its name associated with this underhanded scheme

The people in the BBR have no claim to the actual use of the word "BBR". That name belongs to Smashboards, and it is the site's admins choice on what to do with it. For example, back in 2008 JV split up and disolved the "SBR" and created the "BBR" and the "MBR" because it made sense. People complained at the time because it was a decision made from an administrative standpoint, but over time every has now gotten use to and understood the logic behind two separate rooms that use to be one room. At first (aka right now) this all seems weird, but eventually people will realize and recognize that the BBR and the BBR Ruleset Committee are two different entities that are under the same Smashboards' "BBR" umbrella.

Again, I'll try to get JV to respond to the use of the word BBR, since that was a push from him and as GM of Smashboards he has an overall logic to how he wants the site to operate (like not having two room, one that puts out a recommended ruleset, and one that puts out a ruleset that is actually used).

in favor of the whims of FIVE TOs.

Whims? You realize these five TOs ran roughly 10% of all tournaments in 2010? You realize they have some of the biggest influence on different areas of the country, and are among the most successful TOs in the community?

I just want to fully understand, are you saying that the people who make the rulesets for the most tournaments/biggest tournaments are unqualified to make rulesets for the very tournaments they are running, even though they have already been doing so for years and have met with great success?

 

[etecoon]

as does many world governments (see my example of the American road system).

is there such a thing as a non-shady government? I don't think in the history of the world there's ever been such a thing

 

[Raziek]

I will ask again, AZ. If you're for choice, why are we retiring the recommended ruleset?

 

[Eddie G]

man you couldn't get shadowlink, MMM, and king beef to sign off on it, this stage list has no legitimacy

**** off, dude.

I didn't sign off on any of what is being discussed right now, but thanks for the jab to my name anyway. *****.

 

[AlphaZealot]

Sorry Raziek but you are making extravagant claims like "people have lost choice". Everyone is still free to post up tournaments on Smashboards just like a week ago. Not everyone is free to get a sticky-but that has ALWAYS been the case (as in stickies have always been restricted to only certain tournaments meeting a certain criteria).

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I will ask again, AZ. If you're for choice, why are we retiring the recommended ruleset?

Mind pointing out where this was said?

 

[Jack Kieser]

Jack, they completely ignored the input of a group of players who are KNOWLEDGEABLE about this kind of thing, in favor of the whims of FIVE TOs. FIVE.

That'd be like if you, SuSa, BPC, Twinkie, and myself all came together, made a ridiculously liberal list, and then said, "HERE'S HOW WE DO."

This is clandestine, and you're a little crazy if you can't see that.

The difference is that we aren't admins and we haven't been in power for 3 years. Raziek, what YOU aren't seeing is that we've done it the same way for 3 YEARS and gotten nowhere. Absolutely nowhere. The rulesets are still ignored, the BBR still has no authority, TOs are still acting moronically, and worst of all there is STILL no cohesion in the community.

Weve done it one way for 3 years and gotten nowhere. You say "Oh, it's only 5 people!", as if the BBR didn't have an ABYSMAL 50% VOTE RATE. You guys already don't get much done (although you haven't really been a part of it for long enough to affect that). 5 people are much easier to keep track of than 80. So, more can get done faster. I'm in favor of that.

Frankly, the BBR has been so stagnant and so useless over the past 3 years that a major overhaul like this is right up our alley. Sucks for the people losing power, but they should have done a better job. Not to mention, I've ALWAYS been in favor of the BBR telling us what to do, instead of "recommending" it. They should have said "This is how we do!" 2 years ago, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

>_>

Man, I thought more people would have been fine with the whole exclusive pinning thing and that there were only a handful of whiners. It was mainly those TOs who got their tournaments pinned anyways, with the exception of charity tournaments. It's basically only those 5 who are affected by this, with maybe one or two exceptions. I can't think of any off of the top of my head.

And yes, this isn't a democracy. That should have been made very clear during the MK ban topics. If this was a democracy, MK would have been banned. Three times in fact. Majority rules in a democracy after all, and the ruling was against the majority. I guess some people are slower to catch onto this idea?

 

[etecoon]

peach mains are my favorite people lmao

like shadowlink would just ignore me for saying that but you throw a massive boulder of salt over it

 

[Jack Kieser]

I hate posting on iPods, by the way. Just an FYI. :/

 

[Eddie G]

peach mains are my favorite people lmao

like shadowlink would just ignore me for saying that but you throw a massive boulder of salt over it

Yep, I main Peach. I guess that has something to do with everything lol.

Meh...I bet you're ugly as **** just like every other online troll I've met irl so far; that would explain your desire to troll I guess.

Keep filling those EC/NJ pots dawg.

 

[Raziek]

Whims? You realize these five TOs ran roughly 10% of all tournaments in 2010? You realize they have some of the biggest influence on different areas of the country, and are among the most successful TOs in the community?

I just want to fully understand, are you saying that the people who make the rulesets for the most tournaments/biggest tournaments are unqualified to make rulesets for the very tournaments they are running, even though they have already been doing so for years and have met with great success?

That's exactly what I'm saying, because they aren't going about it by ANY LOGICAL MEANS.

Why is Japes banned? I asked Xyro, he said "The other 4 TOs don't want it, and I'm too lazy to argue about it." (Roughly paraphrased)

AZ. I did not say people do not have the choice to post their own tournaments.

If you take out the recommended ruleset, new players DO NOT HAVE A WAY OF KNOWING THAT IT IS OK TO TEST OUT STAGES LIKE NORFAIR, DP, ETC.

They are going to see this list and go, "This is what's good."

I will say it again. I do not completely disagree with this unification attempt. But what reason at ALL do you have to retire the recommended ruleset?

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

They never said they were retiring the BBR ruleset.

 

[etecoon]

If you take out the recommended ruleset, new players DO NOT HAVE A WAY OF KNOWING THAT IT IS OK TO TEST OUT STAGES LIKE NORFAIR, DP, ETC.

They are going to see this list and go, "This is what's good."

while this is a somewhat valid point, I don't think the old BBR list did much for this either because few tournaments used those stages. if I were new to the scene and started looking up tournaments in my area, it wouldn't be long before I realized that norfair and distant planet are NEVER legal. the truth is that as long as there are somewhat consistent rules most people aren't going to explore beyond that too heavily, when was the last time you played a game on mushroomy kingdom or new pork city? probably not too recently, the thought probably didn't even occur to you

it was yesterday wasn't it : p

 

[Raziek]

They never said they were retiring the BBR ruleset.

With the creation of the BBR Ruleset Committee, SWF and the BBR will be retiring the BBR Recommended Ruleset initiative. While the work done by the BBR-at-large over the years never received the universal acceptance we were shooting for, there were many notable innovations to come out of the room. This includes stage striking, the rulesets themselves, and the accompanying discussion that helped stimulate debate throughout the community--forcing people to weigh the merits of each decision. We know some of these new policies may seem constricting to what has, up to this point, been a relatively free/non-restrictive policy on stickies and coverage. We all hope that most Tournament Directors and members of the community will see the validity and importance of uniting behind a ruleset. We encourage others to be open to making similar sacrifices in order to finally unite this community. All current stickies will be unaffected by this change in policy.

Did you read the OP at all, or just the ruleset, Ryu?

Etecoon, it does not matter whether only a few places accept those stages are not. What matters is that we say "THESE ARE OK, EVEN IF MOST PEOPLE DON'T LIKE THEM."

Also, Etecoon: Key word in your post: IN MY AREA.

Parts of Texas, Nova Scotia, other parts of Canada, parts of the midwest. It's STILL legitimate, no matter how many regions choose just to say "I don't like this."

 

[swordgard]

They never said they were retiring the BBR ruleset.

They did.

10did

 

[Xyro77]

Why is Japes banned? I asked Xyro, he said "The other 4 TOs don't want it, and I'm too lazy to argue about it." (Roughly paraphrased)

wrong. thats how YOU wanted to read/understand it.

 

[fkacyan]

I'm a little appalled and extremely amused that AZ thinks that TOing and stage balance knowledge are even loosely correlated.

 

[Rickerdy-doo-da-day]

These stage/ruleset discussions make my eyes bleed

Oh yes ontopic
...
erm
What even is 'ontopic' in this thread anymore


Does this stage list distinguish between Starters and Counterpicks? I couldn't find anything in the OP saying whether it did or not

 

[Xyro77]

I'm a little appalled and extremely amused that AZ thinks that TOing and stage balance knowledge are even loosely correlated.

It is if u play the game and study/acquire data on the stages through TOing. Thats what he/me have done. ever been to MLG and wonder why they want to know what stage you played on with what character and at what percent and stock you lost at? its all apart of that.