pierreb wrote: ↑
1 year ago
TheAnnihilator wrote: ↑
1 year ago
I'm simply calling out that holding one opinion is ultimately the same as holding the other
Two key differences:
- The card *is* banned, so being pro-twin means your view is contrary to the views of those in control of the ban list.
- Anti-twin don't bring up the subject over and over. Only the pro-twin do. Which is like 1/3 of all posts (or so it seems).
Just because a card is banned doesn't mean it is the correct decision (as originally defined by WotC). See Bridge from Below
I will give it to you there. The Pro-Twin side does bring it up. I would estimate it to be 1/10 of all posts, but it does seem like a lot at a certain point. Perhaps some people believe that the meta would be better off with it unbanned? It's not like someone is talking about unbanning Eye of Ugin
or Hogaak, Arisen Necropolis
. This is the State of Modern thread, where people are free to talk about cards that they believe should be banned or unbanned. If I believe that Companions should start the game in play and have Indestructible for the first 3 turns of the game, I'm free to mention that here. But yes, I understand that it's more the constant reminder. The best thing to do is don't engage or put on "ignore."
It's similar to the kind of posts that I see on FB that are political or to be more specific, about the presidential candidates. You can't really get people to change their point of view, mostly because they are so passionate about what they believe in that they just won't SEE anything different (myself included). People are passionate about Twin, among other cards. People are passionate about Modern becoming a more "fair" meta, with their own definitions of that. You never really are going to get someone to say, "yes, that was the correct ban. Yes, Modern is better without it. It is too powerful to ever be unbanned" and power creep and stupid cards like Oko are just FUEL to this fire. Can't we understand that?
*Just an example of something that could have gone horribly wrong. When Lurrus of the Dream-Den
was played in every Modern deck that didn't have Yorion, Sky Nomad
in the SB with the original Companion rules, many people wanted Mishra's Bauble
banned. WotC made the right choice here, changing the Companion rule. Mishra's Bauble is now back to being an average card. Can you imagine if they banned Mishra's Bauble? Then they would have had to still do the Companion rule change. Mishra's Bauble would be forever stuck on the ban list and half the people in this thread would criticize anyone who says that Mishra's Bauble should not have been banned or should be unbanned. I single decision could have caused mayhem. And yes, many people don't give a %$#%. Mr. Tron player doesn't care about Bauble. Many others don't too. But that is no reason that it should be banned because of another card.