@BKC wrote his posts in a way that offended many people, but he still raises some excellent points and attention needs to be given to them.



Those that frequently play the tier, whether that be those starting in team tournaments, those that participate in individual tournaments year-round, or the frequent high ladder players, should be the ones with the most influence in tiering decisions. While the social forums and groups are an appealing part of this community, the game itself is what draws people in, so we should give the power to shape these tiers to the ones that are actively playing and molding these metagames.  At the end of the day, tournament players and high level ladder players are the people putting on the great individual displays that draw people into wanting to play competitive Pokemon in the first place. Councils exist for a reason, and everyone in the OU council (I can't speak for other SS tiers) fit into this group, so I see no reason for those who don't interface with the communities that actually play these tiers to interfere in these decisions. This is not to say that councils should function as a dictatorship either, suspect tests and discussion threads such as this one are essential for the community involvement that they facilitate and give those that genuinely care about the outcome of a tier to participate and meaningfully impact the tier they care about. People naturally act in their own self interest, so those that actively play the tiers are more likely to propose policies that are genuinely good for the tier than those who do not. Outside perspectives are important for people challenging the status quo in a constructive matter, but players who actively contribute and play our tiers should be the voices that are most often heard as well as the most influential. There are polarizing opinions and not everything will be agreed on from one competitive player to another, their investment is what is important for the competitive scene to stay competitive and grow.