Cathy
Banned deucer.
The results of the first round of stage 3 voting have brought the issues raised in my April thread to the forefront. The suspect voters, who gained voting rights after around three months of testing and experience with the suspects, and who voted in the poll before it was closed (nine people did not vote in time), decided to remove Garchomp from the next round of stage 3 by a margin of 44 to 41, which is three people out of 85, or 3.5% of the voting body.
If Garchomp had received three more votes for "not uber" then he would be allowed in the next round of stage 3, but he would not be immediately allowed back into standard yet. This raises the question of whether the vote was convincing enough to remove Garchomp from the next round of testing—or whether more testing of Garchomp should be permitted in the next round. It is tempting to consider only the present question before us—whether to remove Garchomp from the remainder of stage 3—but eventually stage 3 will come to an end, so we have to consider the long term effects of our policy on what ratio of the voters voting "uber" is good enough to consider the pokemon uber.
If we accept that 50%+1 (a "simple majority") is not good enough to consider a pokemon uber then we need to recognise all of the effects this has on the competitive community, namely allowing into tournaments and the ladder a pokemon that a simple majority of people consider uber. Allowing this "simple majority uber" pokemon into the standard metagame could potentially have negative effects on the game, or on the community at large. On the other hand, we need to weigh these negatives against the advantages of allowing a pokemon to receive more testing, namely making sure we are creating the best rules for all players of the game—including future players who are not yet Smogon members.
The purpose of this thread is to establish under what conditions we are willing to declare a suspect "uber, somewhat permanently" where "somewhat permanently" means as far as stage 3 results is concerned. By voting for a condition, you mean as a corollary that if the condition is not satisfied then the pokemon is not considered to be uber yet. There are several different models we can adopt for this. My list here is definitely not exhaustive, but it lists quite a few options, and you should select the direction in which you want to proceed. We want to see which one has the most support. Here is an explanation of each option:
1. Simple majority to consider a pokemon uber
This is the status quo. Garchomp is not tested further in stage 3. As a corollary of supporting this condition, if and only if 50% or less of the voters vote the suspect uber, it is not considered to be uber yet.
2. Some ratio larger than 50%+1 to consider a pokemon uber
The advantage of a larger ratio is to prevent a pokemon from being banned based on a close vote. If you vote for one of these, you agree the advantages of more testing outweigh any disadvantages, including possible long term disadvantages to tournament and ladder play. In particular, all of these would allow Garchomp to be tested further in stage 3.
Which ratio above 50%+1 we adopt is ultimately arbitrary. There is no mystical significance to 3/5 or to 2/3 or to 4/5. However, there are all greater than 50%+1 and all represent more inertia to declare a pokemon uber. If you support a ratio above 50%+1, vote for whichever you prefer, or some combination thereof: there are very few justifications to be made on this point.
As a corollary of supporting this condition, if fewer people than the chosen ratio vote the suspect uber, it is not considered to be uber yet.
If this option wins, then we will later vote on exactly which ratio to adopt since it is, after all, arbitrary.
3. Two simple majorities in a row in the same stage to consider a pokemon uber
This condition means that a pokemon has to be voted uber by a simple majority twice in a row within the same stage of suspect testing to be considered uber. For example, under this condition, Garchomp is allowed into the next round of stage 3, but if he is voted uber by a simple majority again, he is declared uber.
If we choose to proceed in this direction, then we can also set an arbitrary ratio > 50%+1 that, if achieved for the "uber" side, allows a suspect to be declared uber without a second round of voting.
As a corollary of supporting this condition, a suspect is not considered to be uber until it has voted uber by simple majority twice in a row in the same stage of suspect testing or voted uber by a supermajority > 50%+1 to be determined later (e.g. 2/3+1).
Note: This poll is a straw poll in the sense that its results are not binding on anybody. The goal is to establish what the community favours.
If Garchomp had received three more votes for "not uber" then he would be allowed in the next round of stage 3, but he would not be immediately allowed back into standard yet. This raises the question of whether the vote was convincing enough to remove Garchomp from the next round of testing—or whether more testing of Garchomp should be permitted in the next round. It is tempting to consider only the present question before us—whether to remove Garchomp from the remainder of stage 3—but eventually stage 3 will come to an end, so we have to consider the long term effects of our policy on what ratio of the voters voting "uber" is good enough to consider the pokemon uber.
If we accept that 50%+1 (a "simple majority") is not good enough to consider a pokemon uber then we need to recognise all of the effects this has on the competitive community, namely allowing into tournaments and the ladder a pokemon that a simple majority of people consider uber. Allowing this "simple majority uber" pokemon into the standard metagame could potentially have negative effects on the game, or on the community at large. On the other hand, we need to weigh these negatives against the advantages of allowing a pokemon to receive more testing, namely making sure we are creating the best rules for all players of the game—including future players who are not yet Smogon members.
The purpose of this thread is to establish under what conditions we are willing to declare a suspect "uber, somewhat permanently" where "somewhat permanently" means as far as stage 3 results is concerned. By voting for a condition, you mean as a corollary that if the condition is not satisfied then the pokemon is not considered to be uber yet. There are several different models we can adopt for this. My list here is definitely not exhaustive, but it lists quite a few options, and you should select the direction in which you want to proceed. We want to see which one has the most support. Here is an explanation of each option:
1. Simple majority to consider a pokemon uber
This is the status quo. Garchomp is not tested further in stage 3. As a corollary of supporting this condition, if and only if 50% or less of the voters vote the suspect uber, it is not considered to be uber yet.
2. Some ratio larger than 50%+1 to consider a pokemon uber
The advantage of a larger ratio is to prevent a pokemon from being banned based on a close vote. If you vote for one of these, you agree the advantages of more testing outweigh any disadvantages, including possible long term disadvantages to tournament and ladder play. In particular, all of these would allow Garchomp to be tested further in stage 3.
Which ratio above 50%+1 we adopt is ultimately arbitrary. There is no mystical significance to 3/5 or to 2/3 or to 4/5. However, there are all greater than 50%+1 and all represent more inertia to declare a pokemon uber. If you support a ratio above 50%+1, vote for whichever you prefer, or some combination thereof: there are very few justifications to be made on this point.
As a corollary of supporting this condition, if fewer people than the chosen ratio vote the suspect uber, it is not considered to be uber yet.
If this option wins, then we will later vote on exactly which ratio to adopt since it is, after all, arbitrary.
3. Two simple majorities in a row in the same stage to consider a pokemon uber
This condition means that a pokemon has to be voted uber by a simple majority twice in a row within the same stage of suspect testing to be considered uber. For example, under this condition, Garchomp is allowed into the next round of stage 3, but if he is voted uber by a simple majority again, he is declared uber.
If we choose to proceed in this direction, then we can also set an arbitrary ratio > 50%+1 that, if achieved for the "uber" side, allows a suspect to be declared uber without a second round of voting.
As a corollary of supporting this condition, a suspect is not considered to be uber until it has voted uber by simple majority twice in a row in the same stage of suspect testing or voted uber by a supermajority > 50%+1 to be determined later (e.g. 2/3+1).
Note: This poll is a straw poll in the sense that its results are not binding on anybody. The goal is to establish what the community favours.