What Does It Take For A Decklist To Be Accepted On TMD?

[Zelc]

First, I'd like to apologize if this is in the wrong forum or does not meet the posting guidelines.  I am not trying to criticize TMD's policies.  I would, however, like to have some of it clarified.  Secondly, I would like to apologize if I misrepresent any of the following events.  I do try my best to piece together the situations, but I don't have all of the information.  If there are errors, please PM or reply and I will have it edited.  Finally, I apologize for spelling/grammar/coherency errors.  It's late, and I need to wake up early tomorrow for a road trip.  I'll fix stuff ASAP.

Recently, two events have caught my attention.  First is the Salvager.dec fiasco.  Here, a member apparantly criticized the moderating community after having his threads on the deck repeatedly moved to the Newbie Forum.  What followed was a flamefest after the moderating community refused to touch the third thread.

The second event is more recent.  A while back, a deck named Animal Farm (Turboland + Crucible) surfaced on the Brainstorm forums.  This deck placed second in a Brainstorm monthly online tournament, and recently won a 52 person Minneapolis Lotus tournament.  The creator of this deck was asked to post the list on TMD's forums (before the Lotus tournament and after the Minneapolis tournament).  He replied with this:

I don't post on the Mana Drain. It's a principle I won't break. I find there to be no advantage to posting ideas there. It's not a forum that is open to new ideas. It's full of people who read deck lists...and tell you what they know about deck construction that "proves your idea wrong". And you're only considered valuable if you stay in the social circle of regular posters.

These events have somewhat disturbed me.  In the case of the Salvager deck, it may be that the poster offered an inferior decklist with insufficient testing and results to back it up.  If the poster did badmouth the moderating community, than many (including me) can agree that he got his due.  However, the community did not have to jump in and flame his thread.  Even with other lists deemed suboptimal, my often faulty memory seems to remember many people, including some of the full members, have offered comments that can easily be seen as discourteous dismissing the deck (I don't mean "This deck is bad because of this and this," I mean one-liners.  Sorry if I am misremembering or if my memory is playing it up too much ).  As can be seen in the second event, I'm not the only person to think this way (although I do acknowledge the fact that I could be part of a minority).

This may not seem like a big deal, but such events may make TMD seem too exclusionary.  Many deck or tech ideas may go unnoticed because people are just too afraid to post.  Additionally, this could cause a great deal of people to avoid TMD, which can eventually cause it to decline.  Additionally, TMD is considered the primary source of T1 information.  Many people come here for the latest deck, tech, and metagame information.  If people are too afraid to post or their ideas are instantly dismissed, TMD may no longer remain a viable source of such information.  Such things are not desirable.

I feel that two things must occur to change this.  First, it would be nice if there were a set of guidelines, not unlike the posting guidelines, specifically dedicated to the posting of decklists.  While the posting guidelines do have some rules on the posting of decklists, these rules are vague, and deck threads that have met some of these rules have been shot down.  The new decklist guidelines may include things such as basic game plan (card interactions/choices, plan A, plan B, etc) detailed testing information (for so and so deck: played X games, won X games, how it won, how it lost), what things need to be improved (i.e. This deck loses to MUD, what can I do?), etc.  A minimum number of games tested may be set.  Having a set of decklist guidelines can reduce the amount of chaff posted on these forums as well as give people a sense of assurance that their ideas will not be bashed and dismissed.

Secondly, the jabs need to stop.  It's one thing to say why a deck is bad, and another to just diss it.  Many people are very fond of their creations, and dissing it can be seen as an attack on the creator.  While some decks are obviously suboptimal, excess dissing can scare off potential posters.

I hope this will spur some discussion and some action, and if I'm wrong, then it sure won't be the first time :/.

[Moxlotus]

TMD is bad for Type 1, which is why its members gave birth to:
Control Slavery
7/10
Draw7
Gay/r
4cc
Long(rip)
Hulk
Dragon
Landstill

Yes, I will believe for one minute this website has bad players and decks...
Then look at who wins most big tournaments and how many of them are members or at least read TMD a lot.

Anyways, Some people do get offended when they post a decklist and it is criticized.  Then why post a list?  My friends tell me all the time that my deck sucks and is every way inferior to other decks sometimes.  Truth hurts sometimes that cool ideas and theories just don't work.  It happens to everybody.  Other times people do need to playtest more before offering something up.

[paradigm]

Here's the thing. Sometimes when TMD users come off as being harsh, it's because they see things from a different point, and what comes off as nagging or dissing are merely their attempts (though not tactful) to show you that you are wrong.

It goes back to something similar to what an old pro said. There are many possible plays, but he only sees one - the correct one. Since TMD members (particular many of the full ones) test (as a general rule) much more than the average, they know when an idea will or will not work essentially on sight. Others have tested them already and have validated their own conclusions. Such ideas to them are rubbish because their knowledge on type one allows them to filter through ideas.

The typical counter-argument tends to be "but deck X did good at this tournament." Perhaps it did. Perhaps it did against good decks. But not necessarily versus good players (with good not meaning players just in your meta).  In addition, part of these deck's wins can be attributed to shock. The challenge is reproducing these results consistantly in large-scale tournaments to get believed.

The other option is one that is rarely utilized, and what tends to anger many of the more experienced players- terrible write-ups. You must, MUST explain how the deck will play out in the key matchups (for instance, now, Fish, 4C Control, 7/10 Split, and so forth). Not just what cards are key, but from hard testing (read: multiple matches against skilled opponents) pulling the trends. "This tends to happen," "Deck X tends to do Y" and how your deck succeeds. Not just "you have card X" (which infers, "so you just win").  Posting matchups based on a single card is generally not a good idea, and it's rather annoying to read either since it provides absolutely nothing of substance.

Looking at the Crucible combo deck just posted that won the MN 52-person tournament. The comments that proceeded were based on one thing - people want to know how and why it did good, not just what the end result or the list was. The what doesn't matter to them - they didn't win no prize, they want to know "is this deck worth me putting time and possibly money into," and WHY THAT IS. If it doesn't make sense to them (usually because of lack of justification) the attitude is simply deksukz kthxbye. Or something of the sort.

If you're not one to be in-depth or thorough, well, you have to be - that or prove your worth through multiple and consistent results, and be prepared for scrutiny if you use multiple results - particularly if they aren't in well-established metas. Otherwise, just don't take yourself too seriously. If you make yourself out to be the player who tuned or created the next big thing, you're in for a reality check. Otherwise, if you have the attitude (not say you do, but really do) of "This is not tier one. Can I make it tier one? Any suggestions (including, scrap the deck)?" the reception is better.

The burden of proof lies on the person posting the newer deck - they must explain clearly why they should be taken seriously. I'm not talking about a paragraph here, but extensive information on why the deck succeeds against the key matchups. Only claim tournament wins if the deck has gone to a major (read: 75+ would be a good start) tournament (as in one of the known-by-name tournaments). Anything else is really infused with the confounding variable of play skill and luck.

One example of such (that is not the rule): The deck The Man Show may have been criticized or nit-picked to some degree before the SCG tournament. But when it succeeds at a tournament with 8 rounds of swiss with many (as in over 20) top-notch and proven players, and makes it to the finals, beating Perez, it proves the deck can hold water, regardless of nit-picking. Having a deck win a 52-person tournament (5 rounds of swiss, I'm not sure?) where none of those conditions hold true, is really not that strong an indicator. Any such tournament wins being claimed as evidence is essentially reverting back to using percentages. They don't mean a thing.

Otherwise you merely have long babbling that in turn leads to tl:dr.

--

You're right to say it seems exclusionary. But it really is amplified from reality. Posting a deck that makes sense (because it is fully justified, and the justification is based on hard testing), will be taken seriously. But just because your post is 10 pages doesn't make it good. Most such posts are merely explaining card choices as opposed to matchup analysis.

It tends to lead to one-liner responses simply because people have lesser tolerance for it. While that in itself does not justify it, that is what I feel where the stereotype comes from. Good decks get taken seriously. Winning a tournament does not make a deck good.

If any guidelines were to be made, the main thing is you must justify your deck by explaining key (tier 1) matchups in-depth in terms of how they play out and why the deck will win without the surprise factor (this means multiple paragraphs per deck - you need to have something that would make sense to you were you not using the deck - you need to convince us, not the other way around). Justifications should reflect trends from multiple (I would say at least 20 matches, though a threshhold would merely be a number, really) testing sessions. Otherwise the community is mostly interested in decks that will beat whatever the current tier one is.

Finally, many of such posters need to have some humility. Odds are heavily stacked that they are not the best deckbuilder ever. When flaws are pointed out, there needs to be some sembalance of thought, "maybe they're right." Responses need to be justified in depth using reasonable logic, and not "use card X or card Y. Card Z totally hoses them." Trends are the most important thing here. And remember, many of the time, the solution to the problem is not taking out cards A,B, and C and putting in cards X,Y, and Z, but scrapping the idea altogether. Sometimes you just have to let them go.

Interestingly there's also a since of elitism from the other side as well - where both sides simply assume the other one is wrong and simply argue from there - without checking to see if indeed they are right or wrong. The members like Kowal, Klep, JP Meyer, etc., are usually right. When Meyer says "I don't know what color I would add, but I would definitely cut black," it may sound harsh to the sui black player. But it is true. And that does not depend on whether you think it is or not.

The idea with things like that is that there's not one fatal flaw in the idea other than it's just bad. That's the way it is with many decks, it's just janky, or poorly conceived, or not finely tuned. With those commentsm they allude to the fact that there's not much you can do, the idea is flawed and won't work - so quit wasting time on it. And if the writer does not justify it, there's really no reason to take them seriously since they have no logic behind it or reputation to support it of any sort.

Basically, the more humility you show, the better responses you'll get. If you take yourself too seriously, people will just assume you won't listen and thus, will just flame.

[wuaffiliate]

Read any of the great primers in the primer section, and take hints from those on how to post decks.

The Truth Hurts.

[LotusHead]

My list was posted in Newbie because that's where my deck belongs.  I am not nearly as thorough as other posters.  (I feel I started all this mess, technically.)  I have been told openly in Forums, privately via PMs and in person from people interested in the deck that I have to prove it in combat.  Prove it over and over again.  Sometimes it was said in a negative way (Prove it Newbie!) and sometimes in a positive way (Keep posting results, keep coming to tournies, keep developing ideas. Prove your deck. Oh, and put in Seal of Cleansing and Enlightened Tutors to deal with hoser cards.)

So I will post every T1 tourney that my new deck goes to, for better or for worse, human error or lack of experience versue Teir 1 decks or no.

As to what to do to get a new deck developed openly on TMD, which was my first intent, the Newbie forum is the place where TheManaDrain.com, a private web site, allows such discussion.  My threads there were never intolerably flamed, and usefull suggestions did come through.  No one would ever criticize TMD for keeping the Full T1 forum standers to "the in-club of experts and Magic Elite" because TMD is the Elite winning T1 Vintage Magic Premere Site.  

While I would love to have new deck ideas talked about in the Open T1 forum due to the higher volume of viewers, that won't happen anytime soon.

Until then, check out new ideas in the Newbie section as WELL as whatever the Open Type 1 forum holds.  Otherwise you will miss out on all the good stuff about "the Deck that Shall Not be Spoken Of" and other ideas!

Come on over to Newbie! We welcome all good ideas there.  Check out LivingHell.dec. I think it needs to be tweaked a little further due to my experience against it, but it is called Living Hell for a reason. Let Open Type 1 talk only of Proven Decks, or whatever is deemed worthy.

It's all good.

[The Atog Lord]

I really understand why someone would feel so discouraged upon posting their decklist, only to have that list torn apart. Spending lots of time in theory and testing to create a deck, only to have that deck assaulted by countless people online, is certainly a blow to the ego.

However, in another way, the entire deck “hazing� process oftentimes leads to a better deck. While it may seem to the poster that the TMD community is being “mean� and assaulting his deck, there may in fact be valid criticisms. It is true that posting a deck online will cause other community members to look for the flaws and holes in the deck’s design; yet, it is by pointing out the flaws and short-comings of a deck that the deck can be improved.

And, of course, there are those non-starter ideas which are unlikely to become successful decks. Many players have their pet decks. The TMD forums may sometimes be harsh, but they are also not going to flatter you. Your friends will be reluctant to tell you that your pet deck is never going to work, and it is often hard to see that yourself. However, The Mana Drain will tell you.

This is not to say that you should only play established, accepted decks. Experimenting with lots of innovative deck ideas – even ones that don’t end up working out at all – is necessary for creating new deck types. Tonight, for instance, I was playing around with Crucible of Worlds and Stasis. Nothing worth posting resulted from that, I assure you. But if you don’t try, how are you going to know?

Finally, let me state that if you feel that your deck has been maligned and ignored unfairly, you are not without recourse. No amount of logic, writing, arguing, or self-aggrandizement will convince people that your favorite deck is good as much as winning consistently with the deck. As for myself, I know that I have underestimated good decks before. Remember, we’re all human.

[urza_insane]

TMD is bad for Type 1, which is why its members gave birth to:
Control Slavery
7/10
Draw7
Gay/r
4cc
Long(rip)
Hulk
Dragon
Landstill

Yes, I will believe for one minute this website has bad players and decks...
Then look at who wins most big tournaments and how many of them are members or at least read TMD a lot.

Anyways, Some people do get offended when they post a decklist and it is criticized.  Then why post a list?  My friends tell me all the time that my deck sucks and is every way inferior to other decks sometimes.  Truth hurts sometimes that cool ideas and theories just don't work.  It happens to everybody.  Other times people do need to playtest more before offering something up.

::Jumps to Zelc's defense::

You do realize that he at no point said TMD is  bad for type 1, all he's saying is that we could do better! And I for one totally agree with him. Some people are incredibly mean here, far meaner then they have to be. If you do think a deck can compete don't say "Your deck sucks and isn't competitive" (as I have seen), all you have to do is give the poster constructive comments that don't have to be harsh! The big players, Z, JP, Jacob, Smemmen, PTW, Kowal... the list goes on, aren't going to be playing Type 1 forever ::gasp:: and that means for this format to survive skill must be passed on. When commenting on someones post tell them what to do and how to make certain things better, support them and try to HELP, otherwise don't post.

I am currently building a deck that I am rather attached to and has been performing well, but I'm reluctant to post it. I have no name here (despite being around for a year and a half) and I am almost sure nobody would take me seriously.

TMD is an amazing place and is what makes Type 1 what it is, but in the end isn't this just a game? And aren't games supposed to be fun? Lets try to keep it fun.

Thanks

PS Many people are very nice here, and thank you! But there are some that aren't they know who they are.

[Marton]

Lets try to keep it fun.

Yes, I agree to some extent, but this still is a site on competitive type-1. If you were in a big hockey team, you wouldn't want your coach to tell you to just play and have fun and ignore the advanced strategies. There are local hockey teams which usually are there for people to enjoy the game, and then theres the big players that are in for competition between the pros. Themanadrain is more the latter than the former.

[Ric_Flair]

the jabs need to stop. It's one thing to say why a deck is bad, and another to just diss it. Many people are very fond of their creations, and dissing it can be seen as an attack on the creator. While some decks are obviously suboptimal, excess dissing can scare off potential posters.

Okay, people need to not take deck criticism personally.  People come here for advice.  Inherent in advice is criticism.  If you think your deck is perfect, your wrong.  Sometimes people take it a little far, but the fact is that saying "This deck is AWFUL" is different than "Your a bastard."  No matter how harsh the criticism, if it is deck related don't take it personally and get tougher skin.  I don't care how fond you are of your deck, we don't know who you are, we don't know who most of the people are here (the beauty of the Internet) so the criticism, by definition, can't be personal.  

The new decklist guidelines may include things such as basic game plan (card interactions/choices, plan A, plan B, etc) detailed testing information (for so and so deck: played X games, won X games, how it won, how it lost), what things need to be improved (i.e. This deck loses to MUD, what can I do?), etc. A minimum number of games tested may be set. Having a set of decklist guidelines can reduce the amount of chaff posted on these forums as well as give people a sense of assurance that their ideas will not be bashed and dismissed.

There is a decklist guideline.  All of these things are assumed.  We all assume that before you post something you do extensive playtesting.  I have started two threads about decks since TMD 2 opened and one was based on about 7 or 8 months of playtesting and the other, in the Open Forum, was backed up by about two months of playtesting.  The second venture failed.  It showed me just how high the bar is set here.  One tournament is not enough.  10-20 games are not enough.  People that post here know this and this accounts for the high quality of most of the decklists.  The regulations and standards you suggest would be unnecessarily duplicative.

This may not seem like a big deal, but such events may make TMD seem too exclusionary. Many deck or tech ideas may go unnoticed because people are just too afraid to post. Additionally, this could cause a great deal of people to avoid TMD, which can eventually cause it to decline. Additionally, TMD is considered the primary source of T1 information. Many people come here for the latest deck, tech, and metagame information

TMD is not exclusionary is it exclusive, hence the membership.  If you want to come and leech tech, that is fine and no one will stop you, but the value of this site is the interactivity among its members.  The people here are genuinely nice people.  I have met a dozen or so people and they have been universally kind.  They willing loan power, even entire decks.  They playtest with you even though they are lightyears ahead of you in playskill (Jeff and Jacob), and they share ideas.  To say these people are exclusionary is ridiculous.  If you put forth some effort, TMDers generally bend over backwards to accommodate.  But if you show up and say "Gimme your tech," or "Yur a bunch of snobs," or "You should like my idea," your going to get the same response you would anywhere in life, except at Oprah--SUCK IT.  

People can get a little carried away, but that is because they are passionate about this game, this format, and generally with things they care about in general.  Most of the people I have met through TMD are really passionate about a lot of things, so if they seem a little serious about stuff it is because they care.  And I can never fault anyone for being passionate.  It took me months to make intelligent posts, but I read, playtested, and kept silent.  Then slowly I started talking and it was worth it.  People now a days think things are harsh--psht--MoloDet and Legand would have eaten them for lunch.

One of the problems in life today is an unwillingness or inability to handle criticism.  Look, this "everyone is okay" relativism that flows out of the Dr. Phil self-help gurus is garbage.  We are going to get over this blind spot.  The fact is, some people are smarter than others, some people are prettier.  Some ideas suck.  Some don't.  We, as a society, don't gain anything by making everything OK.  It is a lie, it is ridiculous.  Face it, some stuff sucks.  Jennifer Lopez sucks.  She is awful actress who is famous because of her ass.  Model fine--actress, go see Gigli.  Saying something sucks is true.

The other thing is that TMD is not just a general forum.  When you post here you have access to some of the best Vintage players on the planet (not me others...Carl Winter, Smmenen, JP, Steve OConnell, PTW, Triple S, GI, Jacob Orlove, Samite Healer and a tons of other top flight players).  Now imagine if you walked into the Giant's dugout and told Bonds how to correct his swing or if you shared with him you theory on base stealing.  Naturally there would be a bit of dismissiveness.  What you mistake as circle the wagons elitism is really just a very high level of discourse (which is one of the reasons why people come here).  Look at the discussions of decks, of theory, of policy issues.  People that regularly post here on these issues work hard and think creatively on these issues for a long time.  Steve's comments on the B&R policy were very well articulated and I think that I may have helped further the argument a step more.  I know I spent a long time formulating my thoughts on the issue and I am sure Steve did as well.  So when a person opens a millionth thread on why card X should be restricted or unrestricted without any semblence of thought people get harsh.  If you come to experts for advice and you are stubborn about your ideas, take the criticism personally, and then whine when people are unimpressed by your level of discourse then I think your in for a hard life.  This is way all professions, interests, and fields of specialized knowledge work.  By working hard here to elevate the discourse I think that TMD has produced some great decks, writers, ideas, and community improvements. TMD is probably second or third behind Wizards and Star City as Magic's seminal community force.  But this is BECAUSE of the high standards set by people.  If you want the relativism and automatic acceptance where everything goes then you will NOT be associated with greatness.  If you want greatness, buckle down, work hard, think creatively and you can participate.  We really care about this forum because of its high standards, and in turn, its high standards produce great stuff.  Not always, but a good percentage of the time.

[jpmeyer]

Most decks that you will make will be bad.  It's just the way it is.  I know personally that I've written a couple articles on how I've tried to make certain decks work, but just didn't in the end despite looking like good ideas.  Usually this was because they were either worse versions of existing decks or because they had trouble with cards that are almost universally played.

A good thing to do is to just bounce your ideas off your friends, but have them be very critical.  They'll catch the obvious flagrant problems ("This deck just scoops to Force of Will") and in time, you'll learn how to screen out decks mentally that have problems like these.  This is where a lot of the random one-line responses come from.  These types of reponses are almost inevitably followed up with "Just test it!"--which the person already has done to some extent prior to making their one-liner.

Lastly, it's pretty easy to tell which people want to use their posts to learn versus the people that want to use their posts to show off.  It's the difference between the people that when they hear "this deck is strictly inferior to deck X", ask to get linked to a thread or article on deck X or want to know why that deck is better, rather than the people who respond to that with "omg lol u lost to sui lol."  Or start a thread complaining about the posting/moderation standards.

[Zherbus]

I don't post on the Mana Drain. It's a principle I won't break. I find there to be no advantage to posting ideas there. It's not a forum that is open to new ideas. It's full of people who read deck lists...and tell you what they know about deck construction that "proves your idea wrong". And you're only considered valuable if you stay in the social circle of regular posters.

This is a perfect example...

For fuck's sake people, grow some sack. These type of cop-outs are just distractions from the real problem with deck building issues.

If we aren't open to new ideas, how to do explain decks that WEREN'T created by our 'social circle'? How do you explain our constantly changing format? It's certainly not because there is a shortage of new ideas. Grow some balls people, give yourself a good once-over, and stop feeling sorry for yourselves.

Also, to add to JP's post, make sure your friends/forum chums/whatever are critical and not just sipping on your ballsweat because they respect you. This is why all my bad ideas stop at Meandeck (YES! I come up with some pretty SHITTY ideas and lists. You have to churn out a lot of poop-butter to get to the golden nuggets.) and never make it here. Meandeck people don't care who I am, they will tell me my deck is strictly inferior to something or whatever. No matter how much time I've put into it, I always  take that sort of advice to heart.

[Ephraim]

For fuck's sake people, grow some sack.

It's lines like these that are exactly what people are talking about when they begin complaining about the attacks by members of TMD. Now, to be fair, you're not criticizing a deck with such language, but rather you're criticizing somebody's attitude and in such a case, perhaps a more personal criticism is appropriate. However, similarly caustic remarks appear in deck criticisms as well. Maybe the "good-natured" insults are appropriate among established members of the community, but when used in a criticism of a new poster's deck, they come across as judgemental of the creator of the deck. I have no objection whatsoever to offering serious, honest, and unbiased criticism of an inferior deck. However, treat the topic with enough dignity to demonstrate to the deck's author that you respect him. If you don't respect him, then don't call shenanigans when other people start labeling TMD as arrogant and rude.

[Zherbus]

Arg. The cats stepped on my mouse forcing ye olde back button on the browser right as I was hitting submit. FACK.

Ephraim, you make too many assumptions in your post. Firstly you assume that TMD's core doesn't post respectfully to a newbies thread or a new deck. That's not the issue at hand. People not responding to criticism correctly IS a problem.

When someone posts 'How does this beat Deck X?' or 'Is this any better than just playing Deck Y?' or 'Why are you running card Z when you could run card A?', you should get ANSWERS. Instead we get a hurt 'I-just-got-kicked-in-the-balls' look, a sniffle, and a tantrum.

I have to explain why my 4cC has 4 Scryings, runs Gush in the board, and runs a lone Decree over a 3rd Angel. I had to explain why Void should run Factories over Ports. I had to explain how Legion beat the TnT mirror. I had to explain why I thought Oath and White Weenie had their place in the metagame. Is it too much to ask everyone else the same?

Apparently it is. If a certain someone had just said 'It's probably inferior to Deck X in many cases, but where I play there is a lot of aggro and I feel that this just does better in that kind of environment', there could have been alot less trouble on our boards recently. Instead, ignoring solid criticisms and crying 'you're stifling innovation' just pisses off people.

Stop being distracted by people not being politically correct or diplomatic. We're not here to kiss your ass.

[Purple Hat]

TMD is not exclusionary is it exclusive, hence the membership. If you want to come and leech tech, that is fine and no one will stop you, but the value of this site is the interactivity among its members. The people here are genuinely nice people.

I definately agree with this point.  I spent 3-4 months posting in Newbie before I really felt that I had any idea what I was doing when posting.  I then took some time in the Open to build up my level of thinking/testing before I even thought about taking the membership exam.  Having done that and passed the membership exam recently I feel that I know I have EARNED the respect of my fellow members.  I spent time learning what was good enough at each level and I tried to push my though process about magic to the next level.  

As that occured my ability to analyze the game got so much better that I now find myself routinely sitting at the top tables at tournaments.  My game has gotten better, my deck building has gotten better and my understanding has gotten better.  When I tell someone that I think their deck might not work because it has bad matchups against 8 of the top 10 decks in the meta and they respond with something like "I beat the crap out of outdated aggro, this means I'm better then JP and my deck is better then tog" it's insulting.  It's insulting to me because the poster came here looking for advice/criticism which I honestly tried to give and instead of a response to my points I get random insults thrown at prominent members of a community that I worked hard to be accepted in to.  I think many full members feel the same way.  We take the privlege of our status seriously and we know what it took for us to get it.  When people come in and claim that we all suck, our forum rules suck, our moderators suck, etc.  we take that personally.

Regarding the harsh criticism of decks on these boards I stand by it.  I chose to post here because I knew that my ideas would be read and considered by the best type one minds in the world.  I sought full membership because I want to be considered part of that group.  I don't think that I'm one of the best.  I'm still learning, but I know that I WANT to be one of the best.  The ONLY reason that my skills have improved the amount that they have over the last 4 months is that I was forced to defend my ideas and choices in the face of well informed and unflattering criticism.  If you say that we are harsh on new decks and posters, then I say that is rightly so.  We expect posters to know what they are talking about and when they don't we tell them so.  Our expectations are high but if they were lower the format would be filled with inferior decks.

[Law]

Sorry if my spellings off here and there (im not the best speller).

Ok first off let me make a small list of people I think have a good idea of t1.

The Mana Drain
Most users

Wizos bords
Meepoo2

Starcity games
Stupid Noob

The other MTG web sites dont have any as far as I can tell.

Why did I make this list? It proves in my eye that TMD have most of the people that have a clew of what there saying. Yes I have sean others but this is the one site that stands out.

Now I dont have the strongest ego and I take criticizem more strongly then most other people. So when I get bashed it herts but, give or take some time I come back and get ready for some more. Why since I do learn from what some of the people said (even if I cant use it from lack of cards). Frankly this is one of the few places I dont get bashed to much (meepoo2 did a number on me about5  mounths ago).

Why dont I post like im on fire and cant stop? I used to alot in many places, but over time I have learned that some of my best posts come from when I have a clew about what im talking about (and care about for that matter). Plus I have learned to filter out the bad criticizem (the ones that dont help me at all) and look at the ones that do help in some form. Some people need to learn that little thing. Yes it means I can keep going after alot of bashing/useless comments. Yes I have been off on many things, I dont have the cards I need to be a better player then I am (I have the know how but thats about it), and its a pain when people cant say at least something that will help (like (You deck suchs play deck X instead)) without giving a reson why that deck is better then the one you have (even I miner reson is better then none).

[xrobx]

First off i'm going to have to back TMD on this one, as I have great respect for many TMD members and mods.

This is a FREE website for the use and general knowledge of others that SOMEONE ever so GRACIOUSLY decided to make one day and it blossomed (sp?) into a fast paced evolving community.  This community is still based on the principle laws that we're all here to help eachother and not to be fucking morons raving about their political rights on the internet.

If my deck sucked, and I was going to take it to a tourny, I would LOVE to come on here, post it, and have someone simply tell me "that is a piece of shit, please discard it" and the have that fact re-affirmed by a few other users.  Sometimes people don't feel like explaining why PILES are in fact PILES! This is not unheard of.

Think about it, how many times have you been playing magic, and some idiot kid comes over looking for call of the herds, with his t2 binder full of crap?  Then, say you make some trades, and he mentions he has a similar "black discard deck" to your far superior suicide black deck.  He mentions that some of the cards in his deck are strictly better than your cards, and that yawgmoth's will is "okay".  You know that he is an idiot ,doesn't understand certain concepts in magic and why they are broken, and you DO NOT FEEL LIKE EXPLAINING SHIT to this idiot.  This is perfectly reasonable, as are the actions of some of the members on this board!   We are not being censored for our views and opinions , we are simply, knowingly, and willingly dismissing your (or the posters) stupid ideas, because they are JUST TO DUMB.  It's like trying to tell a retard that they are not as smart as the other kids; they just don't get it.  Again, we're not here cuz of politics class 101, we're here to learn about, and discuss magic.  Stop crying.

[Klep]

The members like Kowal, Klep, JP Meyer, etc., are usually right.

You like me!! You really like me!!  

Seriously, to all those people who are reading these forums but won't post in case they get their feelings hurt: grow up.  Seriously.  For the most part, people here will only tell you your idea sucks if it does suck, and will only ask you questions they seriously want you to answer.  If it turns out that your idea does suck, we do not consider you to be a failure as a person (yet), it just means your idea failed and it's time to go back to the drawing board.
   I hear people talk about how "elitist" we are here on these boards (and we are, a bit), but mostly we just have a very high standard for new ideas and decks to meet.  They must be well thought-out,  they must be reasonably optimized, and they must have significant tournament and/or testing results to back them up.   If they aren't or don't, you will have a very difficult time having an idea taken seriously.  All we ask you to do here is take the time to actually think about your ideas and put some work in on them before you lay them before us.  Remember, we are all experienced players here and will know if you are lying to us.

[defector]

If you feel that TMD is too critical, then don't post here.  That's all there is too it.  Maybe there is a more sensitive web site out there, or perhaps you have a circle of very diplomatic friends that will kindlyguide you to a better version of your build or show its strict inferioroity or superiority to another build.  By and large people here are fine, and we don't ask for much.  If you have an idea all you have to do with it is post it along with a sufficient description.  Thats not too tough.  Take your time and test and think, and I promise you everything will be fine.  If you don't do those things than you will be flamed by some and prodded by others to get with the program.  It isn't complicated and coming here is up to you, not us.
defector

[urza_insane]

I was looking around and found the perfect exaple of what a post should be like, thanks to Sylvan

Once the post is more developed, feel free to post again! We're always happy to hear about a new tournament scene growing for Type One. (You probably want to put it in the Budget Forum next time, or, even better, encourage your Tournament Organizer to allow proxies.)

Go Dr. Sylvan!

[jpmeyer]

Just so people don't think that respected posters never make decks that just aren't good enough

[Dr. Sylvan]

Just so people don't think that respected posters never make decks that just aren't good enough

Oh geez, don't remind me that I suggested U/B Landstill with Psychatog. Or that I played Cradle Guard yesterday. Or that I was the most diligent poster in the Control Enchantress thread that actually got cooberp to post again.

I should really work on that trend.

[Bram]

If you feel that TMD is too critical, then don't post here. That's all there is too it.

Hell yeah! All this bitching reminds me of TV shows where people argue about what should and shouldn't be on TV. If you hate it, why are you on it? Matter of fact, why do you even watch it? I'll give you guys some credit and let the analogy sink in on its own.

This sort of stuff will never be sorted out by discussion. The reason a certain type of basic users will always be pissed off is not because we think of ourselves part of some elite, but that they believe us to be and they're not part of it. I also simply cannot fathom why a person would take it as a personal insult that others do not take his crappy decklist seriously. Jesus christ, people, win some big tourneys with it and we'll notice, OK?

[rvs]

decklists are never accepted. Good discussion points however, are.

[rozetta]

I have to preface this by saying that I do not belong to a deck building team and so, aside from a few friends who are occasionally available for playtesting and discussion, I only have the TMD community to bounce ideas off.

(btw, I'm willing to join a decent team if one is interested)

I'm really into experimentation with card iteractions, especially those which haven't been tried (or at least posted), but _might_ have potential. I'm constantly tinkering around with odd combinations of cards and building weird decks, most of which are obviously non-competitive. However, they're borderline between casual and competitive in the sense that they lack some element of competitiveness, whether it be speed or disruption. Occasionally I might take one of these ideas through some gauntlet testing or the odd tournament. But I know that they're not up to scratch.

If I post a list like this I'll normally preface it with the fact that I know if's a little lacking, but urge people to check it out on the concept or the engine. I know this is not directly building a new competitive deck, but I hope that it might spur some creativity in another deckbuilder to see the missing piece of the puzzle which would take the idea further.

I'm all for this sort of sharing of ideas. In some ways, it's like writing an essay and giving it to someone else to read. If it's just a friend or relative, they'll immediately see things that can be improved like spelling, wording and perhaps some flow or something to do with the content. However, if you gave it to a playwrite or screenwriter, they might get ideas about making an episode of a TV show or a film based on that writing.

I think both types of exposure, both critical and imaginative, are good and necessary. If people don't post new ideas (which have the potential to be built upon) there will be less creativity on these boards.

I'd personally hope that my ideas catch the eye of someone who knows right away where such a deck idea or engine could be used to make an original and competitive archetype. Many heads are better than one in this respect and sometimes the smaller details, the most simple interactions might be overlooked while people are stood back looking at the big picture (the metagame).

Sometimes a player might have an idea about a single "cool" interaction or combination of interations and want to try and get some help as to how to build a deck around it. This is not so much about combos but more about potential syngergies that haven't been used before (or in a long while). I know this is often considered a "Timmy" sort of thing, but it might be valid enough to ask opinions if it's not an obvious case that has already been discussed. I've seen threads like this in the past that resulted in reasonable decks being built. I don't think people should feel they have to have an entire decklist ready to start this sort of topic, as long as the starting post is well written and contains a good description of the thought processes and potential ideas the poster had in mind.

If many members can ascertain that the ideas you had would not be worth pursuing, I think that's a good thing, since you just saved yourself a lot of time and effort (and possibly money). However, if at least one or two people pick up on the idea in a positive way and start building around it, once the deck begins to gel, more interest would be drummed up. Again, I've seen this happen in the past.

One last thing - sometimes a deck idea you had posted might not have been suitable for the global metagame at that time, but there's no reason that the idea would always not fit in. For instance, currently Null Rod is in vogue, meaning ideas that are easily stopped by the rod are just not that viable (e.g. Isochron Scepter decks). However, sometime in the future, Null Rod won't be showing up all over the place. Keep your notes and ideas and bring them back up when things have changed and you'll get a much different reception. Oath decks are a shining example of this phenomenon.

[LotusHead]

Rosetta and MorePhling made some great comments.

Morphling said that decklist are never accepted, but good discussion poinst are. Obviously. Decklist are meant to spark good discussion.  I know that decklists have to be backed up by the thought process involved in each card/mechanic in that deck.  But new deck ideas, even ones not fully fleshed out, should be treated reasonably (read: constructively).

What is the difference between someone say...making a new Salvagers deck (ahem...me.) and someone making an Orc deck.  There is a fine line, I belive, between something on the verge of being good (reasonably competetive) and being absolutelyfucking hopeless.  I belive that some deck ideas (say Salvagers) have the potential to be a reasonalby good deck (even though MINE dies to Fish 100% of the time.) and deserve time to be fleshed out before giving up all hope.

Not all users can be part of a team to secretly work in secret on secret tech. Some are willing to have their ideas posted/discussed in PUBLIC.

Rosetta also mentioned the lact of true T1 testing resources in some users hometown/stomping ground.  This is my situtation.  I post my stuff in Newbie to get constructive criticism and new ideas from those on TMD who care to help/criticize.  

I hope that TMD has a place for new deck ideas to get fleshed out instead of simply hated out.  I agree that Newbie is the place to post if your list hasn't won an Power tournies yet.  But if a user follows the rules as best they can, that user should be allowed to get feedback (properly moderated in general) from TMD users who want to help/ask questions/criticize.

Is that so wrong?

[rvs]

I should kill you for misspelling my online handle. That is a Capital Offense, sir!

There's nothing wrong in posting a decklist with results on how you came to the decklist. However, these results are often found lacking in MANY threads. And by many threads, I mean just about every goddamn one of them.

[MrZuccinniHead]

the best way to find out things about this site and type 1 is to not post anything and just read for a couple months and watch other people make stupid mistakes and get flamed.  That way you know what not to do.

[LotusHead]

Mr.Zookeeniehead commented on not posting until you read enough and know better than to post.

I tell this to people unfamiliar with TMD. (Check it out, but don't post yet).

To MoreFline: Sincere oppologies for misspelling your name. (humbly bowing)





(that was a joke to the before mentioned user for MoreFling's amusement.) EDITED FOR CLARITY

[xrobx]

how dare you spell mentioned incorrectly!! for shame...

[Matt]

This has run its course.[/color]