@SmmenenI read your post on the letter to Rosewater topic...

[Gradek]

@Smmenen
I read your post on the letter to Rosewater topic in the community forum about "unconsiously" boycotting the DCI by holding proxy tournaments and it piqued my interest.  Should the Type 1 community (ie manadrain) essentially boycott the DCI and come up with a set of rules, ratings, and dare I say it our own B/R list.

I think this action may be necessary if WoTC will not allow proxy tournaments to be sanctioned and if the B/R list stays attached to 1.5 along with somewhat hasty decisions that have been made/unnecessary cards still on the list.

I propose that the community (perhaps through this thread) discuss the idea of our own system at length (again it should be kept where all players have access).  

My ideas (and again the thought of our own system is more important than my own thoughts) would be to use the existing rules with the exception of a set number of allowed proxies say 5.  I have no knowledge of how to set up a rating system but I am sure others could.  As to the banned/restricted list, I would set it up like the baseball hall of fame:  let everyone (and anyone) register for a "account" and each account would get to vote for any number of cards to be restricted (assume only unglued/dexterity/ante cards are banned).  Any card that get 75% of the vote would be restricted.  By the same token, a separate vote would be taken for unrestricting cards with the same criteria.  This would keep cards from languishing on the list unnecessarily.  We could start with the current list and work from there.

[Traveler]

Unless you can get someone to run a real championship with a real prize, what is the point?  

I suppose if someone has money and puts up pro tour quality money for players to chase with their own rules, they can.  In fact, if someone ran an event with a huge payout and required people to have not played a DCI event for the past 6 months, there is a good chance people wouldn't play DCI events to make a run at the money.  But in that case, it is their money and they can make the rules whatever they want, like 5 color.

5 color is a good model, but its a different set of rules that has no equivelant to the DCI which is why it needs to exist.

If you want to play 5 proxy or 10 proxy or 75 proxy, have at it.  What point is there to having a rating with no championship tournament that requires rating points to attend?

[Gradek]

This would not prevent people from playing in the few DCI sanctioned tourneys, but would provide us with a new competitive format.  Who cares if there is a large payout, people will still turn out to win moxen and such.

[Dante]

In order to create a "new DCI", you have to get a whole group of heterogenous people to agree on something.  Doing this by committee won't work, because who's to say that we would all recognize that committee as valid.  Creating a "new DCI" just for type 1 would cause a splintering effect and would create confusion.  Not to mention we'd have to create ways to decide on B/R lists, etc.  WotC can do this because they take in revenue from Magic.  We players (for the most part) don't.  There is an enormous effort of time and money to achieve this Type 1 governing body that is really not going to happen without massive outside (outside WoTC that is) funding.

Besides, I'd rather trust the DCI than leave it to a vote of the masses or anything like that.  If we had that, Type 1 would be very similar to 1.5.

Bill

[Dr. Sylvan]

If the B&R list were up to the masses, we would have announcements every month and a 500-card list.

*seconds Dante's other points*

[Mage of Dreams]

Quote If the B&R list were up to the masses, we would have announcements every month and a 500-card list.

I think your being conservative!

To make such a thing viable would require generating income from the MTG tradename. Which would then require licencing etc. Unless theres some rich eccentric out there that wants to run a charity for us!!

While I fully support that the DCI should be a seperate entity from WotC, it seems to late for that now. Such a thing would have had to happen back in '96 but there was no way to know how popular or long lasting TCGs would be.

[Frost]

I agree totally with Dante's points but would like to add three thoughts.

First, who would be able to create and maintain this new database?

Second, how would you get tournament organizers to use this system as opposed to the DCI reporter?

Third, would you still be using DCI sanctioned judges or sanction your own?

The time and money required to do this probably kills the idea.

[xrizzo]

The biggest problem I see is when the "new DCI" restricts or bans a card that people like.  You are going to have a majority of players who disagree with both lists.  Then what do you do?

The answer is simple.  If you have a group of friends that play all the time, come up with a local list.  So if your friend always plays prison and everyone hates him for it, restrict sphere in your circle.  Don't make the rest of the masses deal with your metagame.

The DCI is official, and everyone respects them as the sole governing body for sanctioned play.  Most tournaments aren't sanctioned so it doesn't really matter.  If you want to influence the cards that are restricted and banned, then write wizards, discuss the ideas here, and play with the broken cards while they are allowed.  This is the fastest way to change the list you don't like.

If you can't break the card (ie mishra's workshop) then maybe you will realise it doesn't need to be restricted.  Or you could prove that it does!

The burden, I think, is on the players, not the DCI.