aijinne wrote:
Because the format that they gave birth to, and the conditions they lived with, are not shared with or understood by the vast majority of players.
papa_funk wrote:
I'm very curious how you know this. The format seems to have done very well and is beloved by an awful lot of people, but apparently none of them get it.
I wrote a comment clarifying my position in which I gave you the benefit of the doubt, but on reflection I believe that this was incorrect of me. I have left the full message below, in the hopes that you will read it and understand my position better, but I do think it is important to talk about this response.
I wrote about how Commander has changed over time, and how it was unrealistic to expect people to come in with the same views as the RC when it is no longer just a niche casual format played by a small group of people. You responded by saying "Commander is very popular" and "So you're saying no one gets our philosophy?".
Sheldon wrote:
I'd like to get your opinions on how you think that we might demonstrate to you that we're listening
This is a thread about what you can do that will make us feel like you listened.
You did not listen to or engage with my point.
I did not say Commander was not popular. I did not say that no one understood the RC's philosophy. Those were not the issues in dispute.
I was saying that most players do not understand the philosophy of the format. I think that is fair to say given that your playerbase now gathers on every continent, exists at every budget level, comprises every player archetype, and exhibits every level of experience with the game. I talked about how combo is growing at every LGS, at every level, which points to shifting views and attitudes about the format.
You did not engage with any of this. Instead you chose to misrepresent my words.
What would it take to make me feel heard?
I don't know. But this... This was the opposite of it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ORIGINAL RESPONSE:
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here, and say you're not trying set up a straw man of my point. If you are, however, kindly refrain from doing so. I'm making a good-faith attempt to speak to you, I would hope for the same courtesy.
The format has done well. It's beloved by many people. But in six shops over two continents, I have seen each shop have different views on what is casual, what the spirit of the format is, and what is (un)acceptable. My point, which I think you missed, was that it is easy to have a shared vision when your community is small, when you are all pioneers of a niche experience. When EDH started the rules were different, the community was tight-knit, and there were no tournaments for prizes anywhere. Things have changed.
Now you have hundreds of thousands of people who play the game. My LGS has competitive commander as a FNM format. If I go to events there's whole sections for public EDH. It would be shocking to me, quite frankly, if you could get most of your current players to agree on what your philosophy is. As I've said, six stores and two continents and not one store would have been able to agree with another on the philosophy of commander. And that's a problem, when the major explanation you offer for your actions relies on the philosophy of commander.
Quite frankly, if the majority of people understood the philosophy of commander, do you think we would be having this discussion? Do you think if we understood the RC we would feel unheard? Do you think we'd look at the reasons you give for your actions and say they are "vague" and "inconsistent"? No. So clearly a lot of players do not get it.