No, its you that insist it would be interesting. I'm pointing out that merely being different doesn't make it interesting.
And I talked about how those textural elements of his gameplay are red flags, as they enable him to get around typical constraints of ramp decks and increase his consistency dramatically.
So what your saying is, the decks you want to see from Rof are the same decks the RC wanted to see when they unbanned him, but then they rebanned him because that didn't happen, a decade ago when those decks were far more likely to exist. Ok, thanks for making my argument for me I guess.Interestingly, Rof was unbanned at one point and here's what they said when they unbanned and then rebanned:
unban
We think that while strong and possibly have the potential of such terribly anti-social Generals such as Braids, Zur, or Arcum, it also has many social applications. As with any unbanning, we'll keep our eyes peeled, but we seriously doubt that Rofellos will be a format-changing General.
Then they rebanned it along with Staff of Domination
reban
Unbanning Rofellos as a General was a year-long experiment that didn't pan out. We had hoped it would lead to a spate of fun-and-full-of-fat decks, but that wasn't the case.
We've had our eyes on Staff of Domination for a long, long time, and were hoping that someone would find uses for it that didn't include the term 'degenerate.' That hope proved fruitless. Strangely enough, it's the first and cheapest activation that has proved the most troublesome.
So my interpretation of what happened was that there were a ton of Staff of Domination and Rofellos, Llanowar Emissary decks at the time. It was before my time but I remember what my early days were like...people were waaaaay whinier about infinite combos back then.
These days, no one bats a single eye at Staff of Domination combo decks because the format is littered with degenerate combos.
The type of decks that they *wanted* from Rofellos are the type of decks I'm talking about that would be fun as hell. Rofellos windmill slamming fatties.
Ten years on, there is just so much degeneracy in the format that metas have to self-police. If metas can self-police around Kinnan, Bonder Prodigy they can self-police around Rofellos.
I know all you guys keep saying 'well then ban Kinnan' - That is not happening, because the banlist is being managed differently. If it were not, Golos woulda been banned ages ago. There is very little reason to think they are banning commanders for creating positive resource advantages these days, at least from what I can tell.
BTW, if Staff was the reason Rof got banned, they wouldn't have ALSO banned Staff. Staff being unbanned now doesn't make Rof any more or less likely to get unbanned. Staff, at the time, was THE go to combo that was everywhere, the Paradox Engine of its day, that's why it got banned while other combos didn't.
And, while you picked the quote for Rof and Staff to try to draw a connection to back your argument*, you left out Channel and Tolarian Academy both eating a ban at the same time. Here's the full quote about Rof, including the part you snipped because it contradicted your points,
"Unbanning Rofellos as a General was a year-long experiment that didn't pan out. We had hoped it would lead to a spate of fun-and-full-of-fat decks, but that wasn't the case. First- or second-turn Channel into Emrakul or similar things are simply negatively format-warping. Tolarian Academy, while not quite as explosive as the Rofellos and Channel, fuels easy early-game super-production of mana"
Oh %$#%, looks like even without considering Staff, which you opined was the reason Rof got rebanned, the real reason given was too much too fast too consistently, with windmill slamming fatties actually being the problem! Yeah, Emrakul is no longer legal, but there's plenty of big plays Rof et al enable, and again, contrary to other ramp commanders, with no deck building requirements beyond "run forests because their better than Ancient Tomb in this deck." Tolarian Academy is even called out for not being as explosive as Rof (let alone not present in the CZ and having more restrictive deckbuilding requirements), but still being too much. This tracks with common sense to me, as TA seems more reasonable to unban, and if they're going to experiment with unbanning then it should be the first. There's more ways to punish artifact decks now as well, but I digress. Channel is less consistent, a big risk, and not in the CZ, but I could see that staying banned just because of how easy it is to fuel out Torment or Exsanguinate to kill the board turn 3-4 (or come close enough putting everyone at like 2 and yourself at 120) that its probably never getting unbanned. They're not tough on combo like they used to be, but interactivity is still an issue, and a cheap, easy to use, counter or die combo like that, added onto just being ridiculous mana turn 2 even without a combo, is a bit different. But yeah, Turn 4 T&N just whenever you draw T&N, just playing your lands and your commander, is just gross nonsense.
Saying "Kinnan and Golos aren't unbanned" is relevant insofar as it points out a problem, but that's not an argument for unbanning Rof. This is a discussion of what the banlist should be based on what the RC claims is its criteria and what's good for the format. Kinnan and Golos fit their criteria and are bad for the format. Them being unbanned doesn't logically proceed to unbanning Rof, as the other option, ban those two cards, is still in play and still more consistent with the banlist. If they come out and say "yeah, Golos and Kinnan are fine, we no longer care about ubiquity, consistency, and that much value coming out of the command zone as reasons to ban cards" then sure, I'll say unban Rof. But right now I'm not going to concede that, because the RC has given no reason to concede the "ban kinnan and golos" argument. They haven't changed what they look for, so those cards being unbanned is still the source of contradiction, not Rof being banned, as they contradict what the RC says about the banlist. Remember also, that the RC is notoriously slow to move most of the time, unless a card is such obvious %$#%$#% that they can't not act (Worldfire just being a garbage experience no matter how its used, for instance). How long did it take, and how loud did cEDH players have to be, for Flash to get banned? How long did it take Paradox Engine to get banned? Three years. How about Iona? Golos has been around for less than two years, Kinnan for what, a year? They seem to give the format time to adjust (too much time in my opinion), for a problem commander to see its play fall off as new shiny toys get released. Golos' play isn't falling off, and the format isn't adjusting to fix the problem, so it absolutely should be banned and I don't think they should wait any longer, but at least I'm aware of their customary glacial pace and incorporate that awareness into my analysis.
*By the way, I wanted to explain why I take such issue with these sort of rhetorical cheats. When you (meaning people generally, not you specifically) misrepresent things by omitting information in order to advance your argument, its insulting. You're talking to actual human beings here, we're going to look it up and know that you left out key information that doesn't support your argument to create the false impression of support for your argument, to be blunt people don't respect attempts to trick them, even if you aren't aware that is what you are doing. Its not a game, its a discussion. You aren't scoring points, you're trying to convince people, and nothing shuts people off from hearing you out and considering your arguments like being lied to. This particular trick, removing the references to Channel and TA bannings, is extremely easy to check up on, its archived in a thread just a couple posts up from this one and directly contradicts the argument you try to advance. There's no need to speculate on why Rof was banned when the RC statement spells it out. This is bad form that poisons the conversation, and I'm taking the time to discuss it rather than %$#% you out because, based on what I've repeatedly seen from you, you are clearly NOT a dick. Still, this is an easy rhetorical trap to fall into, even unconsciously. Its the dark side of rhetoric, and its corrupting by nature. There are some impossible legends on here that repeatedly use this trick purposefully and get pissed when they get called out on it because they think their twice as smart as everyone else when their probably only about half as smart as we think they are.
Anything + 
from how many counters it would have....
