1). In my opinion, when a PM specifically says that it is not yet deemed for public consumption it is inappropriate to publish it in a public forum.
2). The guidelines for tournament creation don't really have a bearing on how effective any particular organizer is. There are organizers who will run effective tournaments, keep them moving and play things out and there are those who will not. The idea that "if someone can run an effective tournament they should be able to do whatever they want" is stupid and in general put forth by those who have no idea what they're talking about.
3). The majority of the tournaments that currently run will not be affected by any of the new guidelines. Those that will be affected are the ones that are in place for medal grabbing, whether it be an organizer who wants an easy medal, or more often, those who think it means something to win 2 games to get a Tournament medal. Playing 3 games to earn that medal is neither a hardship nor unreasonable.
4). When a mob is pushed forward with incendiary PMs that have little to do with the grasp of the situation it becomes not only difficult but wrongheaded to look at the opinions of that mob as "the will of the majority" and even if we were to assume that the opinions put forth by the mob were in fact the will of the majority, that does not make it either right or good policy.
5). Tournaments have always been intended to be an inclusive place within the CC community. The requirement has always been that at least 50% of the slots have to be open to the public. I have read many comments that say things objecting to the limit of 2000 points. Clearly some of the posters don't understand or didn't read the proposed rules as it clearly states that 2000+ limit tournaments are allowed. Just as clearly there has to be some line drawn. A tournament for 3500+ players would be open to 25-30 players at any one time. That's a bit silly and against the spirit of the tournament forum which is intended to be open for all. The 2000 point requirement allows players to play with higher ranks without cutting out the majority of the site.
6). Night Strike is bearing the brunt of the attack here buts lets be honest. Anyone who thinks that this is a unilateral decision made solely by a power hungry mod is an idiot. Quite clearly this was discussed in the TD forum and Night Strike, as the head TD is the one who sought out other opinions. He certainly doesn't need me to point this out as anyone with half a brain can read it in the PM that was posted.
.(you will reply to me and I will post them in a thread in our Director forum,
7). There are many comments that say things along the lines of "Tournaments isn't broken so don't do anything" Again, I consider this to be the advice of fools who would tell you to not bother changing the oil since your car is running great. While the tournament section of CC is in general a great place and has shown terrific growth over the past year plus, there are some issues that have been raised that are valid concerns and should be addressed one way or the other. The January threads were quite contentious with many on both sides of the issue that couldn't be bothered to read the comments therein. Medals and medal scrounging has been an issue since they were introduced and as always I'm on the side of I don't care and I don't want to make rules in response to medals. There have been, however, many tournaments that really aren't worthy of the name tournament. Lets be honest here, allowing 4 quad teams to play in a single elimination bracket format is just silly. If you want to do something small like that go make a private thing.
. There has been a question raised about who got NS's PM and the accusation was levied that he was only sending it to those who would support him. Lets be honest here, anyone who thinks that HA (and I'm sorry about naming names here but I don't know who all got the PM either besides HA and myself) was going to be supportive of NS is a fool. They have publicly butted heads on many issues and it is clear that including HA shows that it was not just to those who would support the new ideas and the suggestion that it was is foolish on its face. As for whether the idea of a focus group is wise we're certainly all aware that major companies will spend millions on them this year and sounding out a representative group of TOs in advance of making changes (rather than a public debate which generally seems to become a lot of spam from people who can't be bothered to read) is an effective thing to do.9). From where I sit, none of the new guidelines is really onerous. Sometimes its a matter of codifying things that have always been there, other times its taking common courtesy and making it part of the rules and others its an attempt to stop cheapening tournament medals.
Thank you for actually taking the time to read this
-barterer2002
