@trappedslider

Maybe its something you can get used to, but have you tried posting on mobile? It's not good.

The thing about reddit is you can't complain about the mods. Anyone can make a subreddit with their own mods and cultivate their own community.

Look, at the end of the day, the question Sheldon posed was "What can they do to make us feel like they listened even when they decide something that we disagree with?". Where they post is a component of that, but its not the main part.

To me, the main part lies with reasoning. Now, many posters before me have said that they find the reasons given by the RC to be vague, unconvincing, and inconsistent in application. So that would be the first thing I'd say they need to fix. They need to figure out how to be consistent and predictable. If they think Paradox Engine causes players to snowball resources and time, and they want to ban it, fine! But then they have to look at all the other cards that snowball resources and time and tell us why those cards were fine so that we know in future what is or is not okay. Tell me why Stasis is fine, or Rhystic Study, or Expropriate, and give reasons why they are different! Help me understand firm criteria.

More than that, understand that uncertainty can be created anywhere. You had an article, "Cards You Should Not Play In Commander", and you explained your feelings on each one. Great, this helps us understand you! Except it doesn't, because almost all those cards are still legal. Do I need to fear that Wound Reflection will make the list eventually? I doubt it. But some of the other cards? Well, I don't know. It feels like the difference between banned and unbanned on that list is arbitrary, that there is no real dividing line at all.

If I can't understand why you take one action and not another, how can I not question your judgement? If it goes against me, how can I not feel ignored?

I'm not saying ban or unban every card to make things neat. I'm saying try set guidelines we can see and understand. I work in a legal field, and one of the things I most love about the law is that it strives for certainty in a fundamentally uncertain world. If a judge rules against my client, it seldom feels like they did so without applying their mind. I can look at precedent, look at the rules, and I can nod and say "That makes sense". I may disagree, still, but I can respect how they came to that conclusion. Take the uncertain philosophy, write it down in certain terms, tell us how you evaluate things, why you make exceptions, why you feel cards are egregious, explain it in concrete terms, and then give it to us.

It doesn't help me to know you like untuned Karador. It helps me to know why Sol Ring is not banned.

Rule 0 is definitely more of a symbolic gesture than an actual rule. WotC didn't need a rule to say, "If you're playing Magic with your friends, you can play with any cards you want", since it's obviously the case, and I've seen 4 Sol Ring casual decks piloted by frayed-edged, weathered, unsleeved card casuals. It's all in good fun, and they didn't need a rule to tell them it's okay. The thing about Rule 0 is, it only works when it's not needed. Pretend Rule 0 didn't exist and four Commander players got together and decided to run Un cards. There would be no consequences.