No one cares about your opinion, you're one of the most toxic immature player in the community.

This post was edited by JeneralJason on Aug 15 2022 10:40pm

Enough people did that you got your nuts cut off in the deal.

This post was edited by inkanddagger on Aug 15 2022 10:52pm

You're just proving my point.

I'm sure your daddy is telling you. SHHH stop talking shit and making us look bad.

This post was edited by JeneralJason on Aug 15 2022 10:41pm

Unlike you, I’ve been around since the beginning of melee on Diablo 2. I’ve earned the right to talk shit, because I’ve paid my dues and I know what I’m talking about. This merger was done too quickly with too many concessions. The only wins are the Discord and you being sat down.

There are also 30 minute old accounts voting lol

This post was edited by inkanddagger on Aug 15 2022 11:14pm

You have the emotional intelligence of a 3 years old, and that’s being generous. Anyone in your discord knows it.

Ok

I want to be clear about a couple of things:

1) I did not write or come up with the idea to write this post. I was asked to by the "leaders" of both sides as a way to have a person that is more neutral post this. I agreed and here I am.

2) The outcome of this change, if passed, will not be drastically different than what we currently have. It is more of an image change than anything else. Someone said earlier today we have "1.5 ladders" and that is not a good look for the melee community. We have one Ladder that welcomes all classes and one that welcomes all minus wolf druids, even though the consensus now is that zealots and wolf druids can face off in very fair and evenly matched duels. There is no longer reason to have wolf druids be banned from any Ladder. This was meant to correct that.

There are some rules that we agreed to such as stopping the shockwave of Oaks. These are changes that we can rework in the future if we don't like them and I consider them to be quite minor in the grand scheme of things. Bringing together the melee community is more important to me. But I want everyone to vote their conscience and do what feels right. If the rules aren't to your liking, please vote no. We can keep everything the same if that's what the community as a whole wants. I will be completely fine and support the community no matter what way the vote goes at this point.

That's all I want to say and I hope everyone can get along.

"These are changes that we can rework in the future if we don't like them and I consider them to be quite minor in the grand scheme of things."

I don’t think this is likely. We would be negotiating from a place where we already gave away any power we once weilded by having a separate ladder.

I could be wrong, but I fully expect that there will be a 4-6 month ladder where this current system is set in stone, and there will be no further votes about oak sage or tap. I also expect Jason to be invited back into core leadership within a month or two and to take a more active roll in decision making. This is a pretty historically analogous to any situation where a democratic nation or interest group has capitulated to authoritarians in the name of peace and unity. Politics are politics, and they scale down to this level as well. Sure; we’re voting. But we are voting on rules negotiated in a back channel with only a few people, and with pretty much every concession asked for given. There will be a slow erosion of democracy from this point forward. I find that sad, because this is one of my favorite all time games and I was there at beginning of GM rules being formulated in the early oughts. I’ve seen it happen before.

This post was edited by inkanddagger on Aug 15 2022 11:25pm