a

	The problem isn't whether it's unfair or not, on that point I would agree with what you showed me. Being able to do those 'electric's with ease is a pretty clear advantage, but even then, it's not a one way street. There are pros and cons to each depending on the game. For example, it's difficult to do a clean tk2367 input on kb/hitbox, which I found to be relevant in melty, unist, and dbz. Another example would be full circle motions 360 or 720 for characters like Zangief in SF.
	The problem isn't that it's not something for you to decide either. As you mentioned, it's an ongoing debate and it's a good thing for people to participate in the discussion.
	The problem is that you can't hold competition and sportsmanship sacred while at the same time arbitrarily deciding the rules and denigrating one side or the other before the verdict is out. Not to mention the possibility that the competition in e-sports, not at the "professional" level but at the "optimized" level for each case, has innately never been a level playing field. Just look at the relatively frequent turnover rate of games in any competitive genre, of the frequent reshuffling of meta in league via "balance patches" compared to its parallel in traditional sports, which would be developments in biomechanics and sports science. The cause for concern with the development of the hitbox, and other newer controllers such as the 'GafroBox' Daigo used which was the one that *actually* got banned, is that a 3rd party has interjected, perhaps in a blindspot of game developers or other "e-sports authorities". But even then, constant innovation and variety is perhaps the main charm competitive e-sports hold over traditional sports/board games.
	The 'arms race' for new tech and new strategies with each new game or patch in e-sports supports the viability of a competitive gaming scene, but at the same time it, perhaps intentionally, covers the inevitable imbalance that results from the sheer amount of variety in modern games, as much as developers may try to combat this. Not to say that this is a good or bad thing. While traditional sports have selected, in the darwinian sense so to speak, for pure traits, attributes, and technique both physical and mental in players, e-sports very rapidly selects for strategy because new releases/patches just as rapidly create them while rendering old ones vulnerable. The way teams and gaming houses in e-sports have developed seem to be something of a "mixed breed"; 50% like the circles around traditional athletes purely supporting their development, and 50% like thinktanks that are hashing out the optimal strategies with each new game or patch. With this kind of nature at the core of the competitive gaming scene, the path forward for game developers could just as easily be one of prohibition or one of inclusion for not just the hitbox but other innovations in the gaming industry as well (without considering any kind of financial motivations, whatever they may be).
	You could say it's unfair because as time goes on, tiers become more apparent, and situations appear where strategy X always dominates strategy Y or the existence of character A trivializes any reason to pick character B.
	But you could also say it's more fair because allowing the development to take its course in the rules as they are, as in traditional sports, simply selects for traits in the population well suited to the sport, denying others any chance at success, while the conjunction of variety and quick turn-over in competitive gaming gives more people a chance so it's more fair demographically.
	In the case of the hitbox, discussion seems to be centered on the its capabilities and whether or not it lets you do something you can't normally do. That's something that can easily be fixed or changed for future games by developers, perhaps by including various selectable input methods to equalize any possible advantage granted by a new controller. But if the game's life is extended long enough people would likely still discover advantages or disadvantages because it's fundamentally different. Perhaps even something as small as "it's easier for the brain to react using the wrist to slam buttons on the hitbox than using the thumb to press buttons on the controller" may be reflected in the results of competitive players if the game is given enough time, to make up an example. And obviously, this is an example that can be extended to the current shlew of available input devices as well, not just with the advent of the hitbox. Ultimately, it's just a matter of where they want to draw the line, and that's a discussion I don't think should be had without considering the possibility that innovation and change are part of competitive gaming's charm itself.