I got most of the way through, up to the first few posts of page 5, so I apologise if Ive missed an important point since there.

I wanted to add in regards to tutors, if you take away the best black tutors you will push the game further into the grips of UGx decks. Blue gets to draw so many more cards than anyone else, and while black has some good life for cards draw effects it is the tutors which allow you to get the card quality you need to combat the card quantity of the ug decks.

I also would hate to see Mike banned. He may be half of the 2 card combo poster, but most of his combos are 3 cards and are as unachievable with Melira, and are completely disruptable with removal, counters or grave hate.

I do however fully support the removal of time magic from the format. It takes zero effort or intelligence to play a time walk, it is at least a free explore and at worst an avenue to solitaire. Even just killing the ones that dont self exile would make a big dent in the power and proclivity of UGx, because in reality if you're playing blue and not playing time warp and co then youre playing a worse deck (but are in my opinion a more fun player)

This is what I think matters when what to actually ban is looked at. There will always be people who run the well tuned decks, and there will always be people who don't have a lot of options on where to play.

Most of the bans that I see are either cards that mechanically interact with the format in a bad way, or ones that are able to be broken in combo with other cards. The bans on combo pieces look to me like they're directed at cards that don't have any kind of equal (Protean Hulk, Recurring Nightmare, Painter's Servant), and I think that's a good stance to look at things for future bans.

Some of the cards I would agree with Gath on as far as seeing banned would be Deadeye Navigator, Craterhoof Behemoth, and Tooth and Nail. They all look to be on another level compared to other cards that try to do the same, unless I'm missing something. As for the extra turn stuff...nobody in my play group uses any of those cards, so I'm more indifferent towards them. If UGx decks are that much of a majority, then I think taking the them down a notch might give some more variety that I thought was what the format was supposed to be (People building decks they want to play, not decks that are most popular or have the best chance of winning, and it sounds to me like UGx decks are that kind of deck).

Then I guess we dont agree about what the issue is. Because I think the power level issue will always be there, and losing to a tuned deck on 6 or 7 isnt appreciably better than 4, because a lot of it I see has to do with how they lose. Saying 95% of anything in this format really isnt useful, because we have no data to support it.
I get thats an issue in some places, but strongly disagree its across a large part of the stores / metas. So what it seems like is a few people want to improve their 'semi-competitive' metas by banning what they think the top 'broken' cards are, but don't seem to see how that would affect other groups. They think since its better for them, its better for everyone. Disregarding the folks who want a minimal ban list, just 'taking the top off' the current cEDH lists wont improve the game for most people, and would be a giant shift in what the ban list is designed for. Seems liks a net negative.

Do you honestly believe a competitively tuned deck has an equal number of chances of winning on turn four and on turn seven? Players have more balanced resources in later turns and are able to stop combos and other degenerative plays with more ease than early turns. Not to mention you will have revealed a lot more of your strategy on later turns, so the entire table can react accordingly if they suspect you're running combo.

And you don't need data to support that. You only need to talk to players in the same situation as me, and they will laugh at you if you show them a 'competitively tuned deck' without broken mana rocks and tutors.

Aren't you, like, doing the same thing right now? Disregarding the folks who are trying to reach a consensus over what should be socially acceptable for irregular playgroups? Besides, what evidence do you have that the current and "minimalist" ban list brings the most happiness for the format and its players? Because what I'm getting from this thread, and my own experience, is that Commander still has a long way to go to make players understand its philosophy.

No, and thats not what I said. I said it does not matter in terms of other peoples fun.Quite true, but a power level issue will be there in later stages too. Taking the top off wont change that.

I have no doubt people you play with would agree, thats due to a lack of perspective on your part, not on your view being correct. Of course they are going to play those cards, but removing a few (as has been postulated) wont have a significant outcome to people who push the envelope. You would need a large shift, which I am posting about as a net negative.
I dont see anyone here trying to reach a consensus on whats socially acceptable, because its not possible. Thats always going to be an opinion. So people are trying to legislate their opinion as rule. And yes I am posting in defense of the rules set I see as the best. Yes the RC has setup an arbitrary ban list, as any would be. No I dont think it would be improved by catering more towards competitive play. You cant play the middle, they picked a side. I happen to be on that side. I have none, but do on seek a change. People who want one should have some, or take it upon themselves to make betterment for their group. Please do so without negative impact on the rest of us. Plenty of people understand just fine, and plenty don't, but using a few of the same people making the same arguments over and over isnt representative of a larger issue without data. I don't think you have any because I think the groups who choose to play competitively, and choose to use the RCs ban list exclusively, is going to run pretty short. Those people should take some initiative and fix their issues.

Hell No. I and everyone else here have every right to lobby their opinion and share it with others who *gasp* might have a similar opinion, or other ideas on how they'd like the format to change and to rally together to try and enact that change. If you don't like it you're more than welcome to continue arguing your point of view, otherwise do us a favor and get out. You don't get to shit on people for wanting to make change and demand they stop just because you don't like what you're hearing.

As to point b: https://www.reddit.com/r/CompetitiveEDH/

there is literally an entire subreddit full of people dedicated to doing exactly what you think is a short list of trolls under bridges in isolated pockets of the player base.

I couldn't help noting that the regular Commander subreddit has just around four times as many subscribers as the competitive one. Maybe those numbers mean nothing, but they could mean something.

Just adding onto what Segrus said, but one subreddit does not a community make. There's almost 7800 players in there, true, but you can't seriously believe that accounts for even a majority of the competitive players.

I'm...not entirely sure if you're pointing this out to me, but if you are: true, there's a distinct possibility there's more than 7800 competitive players for Commander; of course, there's probably a distinct possibility there's more than about 30,000 Commander players (the number of subscribers for the regular Commander reddit). So that argument really goes both ways, and returns us back to zero--which is kinda where I left my previous post.

It wasn't meant to be directed at you, sorry. It's a pain getting posts out on mobile.

I entirely feel your pain.

I consider this forum a community- likeminded individuals who are interested in the same sort of games, roughly speaking- and I'm pretty sure we number less than 7.800.

Just to be pernickerty: 28363 users (though cut all the bots & inactives and you'll probably get around 30 users! )

Of course you do, but don't expect it to happen. And don't expect those of us who like the current arrangement just fine to sit idle. I am not shitting on anyone, or attempting to stop any discussion. I am offering a useful alternative that too many of that idea dismiss: Put in the work to create something you love without messing up the current format.

I don't think they are trolls, and didnt say anything negative about them outside their lack of perspective on how their ideas are negative to the many others.

I misspoke. The actual point was the bit about 7800 players not really being a majority.