[Article] Forsythe on B&R

[Machinus]

Usually this isn't a big deal, but this time he has written a really interesting article that I think you should take a look at.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/af43

We had taken Braingeyser off the list last time to test the waters, and when it continued to not be played, we felt it was fine to take Stroke off as well. Nothing new was restricted, but we are keeping an eye on about a dozen cards.

If trends continue, something will have to be done about the unholy trio of Workshop, Trinisphere, and Crucible of Worlds. We're not there yet, and perhaps we never will be, but if current trends continue we will have to react. Again, I don't want people living in fear that the DCI is after their favorite cards, but I also don't want players to think we aren't aware of one of the biggest hot-button issues in the format.

[Moxlotus]

I think it is reasonable for them to gradually unrestrict stuff.  I thought it was pretty obvious they did the test w/ braingeyser before Stroke.

It is also good to know that:
1. the DCI is listening to type 1 players and are aware of the format
2. They look at results, not just people's articles and bitching on message boards.

[Nova442]

It seemed like his reasons for not doing anything in Standard were a cop-out.

"We screwed up terribly with the affinity mechanic and putting the artifact lands in on top was an even worse mistake, but we're scared that attempting to correct the format might not work, so you're stuck with affinity dominating until it rotates out."

[rozetta]

Although, on that note, he was correct that the new type 2 meta is still forming and many decks take a great deal of time to tune and perfect. I don't know a lot about standard, but it seems there are a fair few deck choices out there, at least one of which could grow into something strong with the next expansion sets.

[Necropotenza]

...we are keeping an eye on about a dozen cards.

Huh? This seems pretty insane to me, really.

[Kowal]

The half a paragraph about Workshop/Trinisphere/Crucible was pathetic.  I was really disappointed.

[dandan]

Half a paragraph. You were lucky. We used to live in a shoebox!
What! A whole shoebox?
(TOPIC edit - stop the Monty Pyython and Get on with it [we interrupt this Monty Python edit to point out that the previous interruption has, in fact, quoted Python and so has been interrupted])

Nothing on Portal. Nothing, zip, nullo, squat. You can bet that this disappointed big fish has already sent his thoughts to Aaron. At least I have 3 more months to buy Portal cards on Ebay (I really don't have many)...

[Fominian]

On the note of portal:  Though I feel that it will eventually be incorporated into Vintage and Legacy, I believe that that day is far off for multiple reasons.

The foremost being that Legacy is still young (under 3 months) and still needs time to stomp out any kinks that may have been created unintentionally with the format.  And although Vintage and Legacy are no longer dependant on each, they would probably include portal and the other starter sets into both at the same time.

So with that said, the DCI has probably considered it, and are sitting back to let things evolve and settle first before they include new sets (that have been up to that point entirely banned) into it.

As for Stroke - It was the reasoning I came up with why they unrestricted 'geyser and not stroke last time around.  My bet is that next time off comes Mind over Matter and Voltaic Key (if not both at least one).

And finally, one the note of them keeping their eyes on cards:  The number actually surprised me some, not in the sense that they are watching to much, but I actually thought that they would have more blips on the radar due to the general attitude of caution the entire department seems to have (that is the way I at least have it figured given past events).

[VGB]

That needs to be required reading.

I daresay it makes the most sense out of any article I've ever read about drafting a policy for banning/restricting cards.

[dandan]

Vintage is THE format where you can use all* of your cards. Legacy isn't.

Saying that Portal should be banned in Vintage because another format is new is pretty flawed although it is probably the best argument against allowing it I've heard to date.

*Except Ante, manual dexterity and Un-cards

[VGB]

Vintage is THE format where you can use all* of your cards. Legacy isn't.

Saying that Portal should be banned in Vintage because another format is new is pretty flawed although it is probably the best argument against allowing it I've heard to date.

*Except Ante, manual dexterity and Un-cards

My post on Portal @ Starcity

Of course my thoughts are just speculation, but you have to consider first and foremost Wizards is a business.  They look at the long-term bottom line results, and the truth of the matter is that one can't make a business case that legalizing Portal will result in increased profits for Wizards, because:

1) The sets are all now long out of print; i.e., only the secondary market garners immediate profit.
2) Portal sets were intended as a "gateway drug" to the real cardboard crack.
3) The only people who want Portal legalized are already buying product - new customers increase profit margins, not established ones.

The only argument to the contrary is that Wizards should make an effort to appease their current dissatisfied customers,  which I think there simply aren't enough of to justify any effort on their part.  You also have to conider, in light of Forsythe's article, that they also regard the people who might become disgruntled by unrestrictions/unbannings.

[Methuselahn]

"Other cards needed to be unrestricted in Vintage."  I don't think “need” is the right word. If the card isn't good enough to be played, then it doesn't really matter if it's on the list or not. If it is good enough to be played, then perhaps it deserves its status.

It is hard for me to believe that A.F. doesn't understand consistancy in Vintage.  Of course 4 Workshops are very strong, but who is going to play only one (sans Belcher, as a wish target)  What deck uses 1 Bazaar of Baghdad or even better, how could you possibly build a deck with a single Dream Halls.

Alot of these cards are SO heavily relied upon in the decks that use them, it is all but impossible to use just 1 instead of finding a different deck to play.

[Hi-Val]

Huh? This seems pretty insane to me, really.

I think that this refers to the watch list. When I talked to AF at SCG VA 2: Electric Boogaloo, he said that they've got a list of cards that comes up every time. These include Drain, Shop, Bazaar, and Welder right now.

At least Brainstorm wasn't restricted like the forumites on SCG wanted!

[krakcer]

Has anyone thought about what this will do to newcomers to the Vintage format? Think about it, cards like Mana Drain are almost quintessential to any control deck. People like myself that are still developing their Vintage card pools might think twice before purchasing such cards because of possible bannings. I understand that a game such as Magic with a format such as Vintage require much dedication, but for some it is a bleak decision they have to make whether to buy or do without so many cards the format deems necessary to survive. Decks like Fish and Stephen's new Doomsday deck make a cheaper alternative to getting started in Vintage, but playing Doomsday requires more skill then meets the eye, and how many of you would want to play Fish all the way through a Vintage season? Yes restrictions might make cards cheaper on ebay, but finally getting your hands on 4 Workshops just find they are getting restricted will put any man to tears. No 1 deck needs to totally dominate any format, but I don't believe that is happening right now in Vintage. As in Forsythe's article, keeping an eye out is a good idea, and I believe slowly unrestricting cards is an outstanding concept, but I fear that they will not do the same and restrict cards one at a time. Forsythe mentioned 12 cards, lets just hope multiple cards don't get the axe during banning and restrictions, because I'm afriad it will run off many potential newcomers.

[dicemanx]

It is hard for me to believe that A.F. doesn't understand consistancy in Vintage. Of course 4 Workshops are very strong, but who is going to play only one (sans Belcher, as a wish target) What deck uses 1 Bazaar of Baghdad or even better, how could you possibly build a deck with a single Dream Halls.

In fairness to AF, I think he was suggesting that cards on the restricted list would not see play, even as a four of, if unrestricted. He's echoing my exact sentiment that I posted a while back, which in turn was echoing what people were saying from some time ago: there are cards on the list that will either be severely problematic (in combo decks primarily), or they will not see play in competitive decks. If it's the latter, then it hardly matters if they are restricted or not - and as AF suggests, there isn't any great urgency to tidy up the b/r list.

What surprised me was that AF actually identified Crucible as a potential problem card. It seems that either they were reading TMD and were swayed by our arguments, or they already had an understanding that CoW (much like FoF or LoA) is a little too good at what it does - card drawing/mana consistency for a bargain price of 3 colorless AND the ability to lock out various deck archetypes or at least cut off colors. I still doubt that CoW will ever get restricted (just like Welder or Brainstorm will most likely not find their way onto the b/r list), but I'm keeping my fingers crossed that they will kick out Trinisphere long before they consider touching Mishra's Workshop. MWS is responsible for far too many "fair" deck archetypes to be so ignominiously axed just to take care of Trinisphere and to a much, much lesser extent CoW (which will be played and abused in non-WS decks).

[jpmeyer]

Has anyone thought about what this will do to newcomers to the Vintage format? Think about it, cards like Mana Drain are almost quintessential to any control deck. People like myself that are still developing their Vintage card pools might think twice before purchasing such cards because of possible bannings. I understand that a game such as Magic with a format such as Vintage require much dedication, but for some it is a bleak decision they have to make whether to buy or do without so many cards the format deems necessary to survive. Decks like Fish and Stephen's new Doomsday deck make a cheaper alternative to getting started in Vintage, but playing Doomsday requires more skill then meets the eye, and how many of you would want to play Fish all the way through a Vintage season? Yes restrictions might make cards cheaper on ebay, but finally getting your hands on 4 Workshops just find they are getting restricted will put any man to tears. No 1 deck needs to totally dominate any format, but I don't believe that is happening right now in Vintage. As in Forsythe's article, keeping an eye out is a good idea, and I believe slowly unrestricting cards is an outstanding concept, but I fear that they will not do the same and restrict cards one at a time. Forsythe mentioned 12 cards, lets just hope multiple cards don't get the axe during banning and restrictions, because I'm afriad it will run off many potential newcomers.

This was the main reasoning behind his sentiments of "we don't want to create a culture of fear."  People keep bringing up cards for the B/R list in every format and it makes people nervous that they won't be able to play their deck any more.  And remember, this applies in every format.  In Type 1, you get worried that cards that you spent a lot of money on will be worthless, and in the more recent formats like Block and Standard, it's extremely frustrating when you buy some packs and then notice that you can't play with the only good cards that you cracked in those packs.

[majestyk1136]

The solution to that problem is not to simply crack packs.  At least draft them when you're going all in with a new set in standard.  Oh yeah, and the DCI sissed out on the standard stuff.  Disciple deserved the Axe at the very minimum in order to restore order in standard.

As far as Vintage goes, it's good that they're at least conscious of the disparity between standard and t1 when making these announcements.  I would like to see the watch list come back however.

[krakcer]

This was the main reasoning behind his sentiments of "we don't want to create a culture of fear." People keep bringing up cards for the B/R list in every format and it makes people nervous that they won't be able to play their deck any more. And remember, this applies in every format. In Type 1, you get worried that cards that you spent a lot of money on will be worthless, and in the more recent formats like Block and Standard, it's extremely frustrating when you buy some packs and then notice that you can't play with the only good cards that you cracked in those packs.

Thanks for the reply, I reread the article and that line made more sense. I guess I didn't put it into that kind of context. It's just that you don't hear a lot of people sound like they worry about it since the Guru's already own their cards. After rereading the article it made my rather happy that even though it wasn't as clear as it could have been to the non-Vintage savy, but they are still thinking about it. Again thanks for the reply.

[Machinus]

Has anyone thought about what this will do to newcomers to the Vintage format? Think about it, cards like Mana Drain are almost quintessential to any control deck. People like myself that are still developing their Vintage card pools might think twice before purchasing such cards because of possible bannings. I understand that a game such as Magic with a format such as Vintage require much dedication, but for some it is a bleak decision they have to make whether to buy or do without so many cards the format deems necessary to survive. Decks like Fish and Stephen's new Doomsday deck make a cheaper alternative to getting started in Vintage, but playing Doomsday requires more skill then meets the eye, and how many of you would want to play Fish all the way through a Vintage season? Yes restrictions might make cards cheaper on ebay, but finally getting your hands on 4 Workshops just find they are getting restricted will put any man to tears. No 1 deck needs to totally dominate any format, but I don't believe that is happening right now in Vintage. As in Forsythe's article, keeping an eye out is a good idea, and I believe slowly unrestricting cards is an outstanding concept, but I fear that they will not do the same and restrict cards one at a time. Forsythe mentioned 12 cards, lets just hope multiple cards don't get the axe during banning and restrictions, because I'm afriad it will run off many potential newcomers.

I think there are a few implied points here that are being addressed as a whole, but not individually.

If we were to examine the habits and practices of the two most powerful governing bodies of the game, we would notice that they obey different laws and behave according to different rules. I am, of course, talking about R&D, and the DCI.

Type 1 is in a very peculiar position. We are so far out of the sphere of influence of R&D that they have to execute planned strategies in order to exert any kind of influence on our environment. We saw this kind of projection in CotV. However, we are very much under the immediate control of the DCI. So as obvious as it already is, it doesn't really matter what anyone else thinks, beyond the speculations that we all can make about what message boards they read, whose letters they pay attention to, etc.

If R&D had its way, then yes, we would certainly have already been relieved of our astronomically broken Mana Drains and Mishra's Workshops. But this is the wrong mentality to consider. The policies of R&D and the direction they are moving the rest of the game in are really very irrelevant to us. What is important to us and the nature of our format is how it functions now, what is wrong with it, what is right with it, and why. The way the DCI treats us is improving dramatically, and we should be happy about the amount of thought and consideration that goes into the decisions which change the game on a fundamental level.

This past year has been a historic one for Type 1. The level of innovation and participation was clearly unprecedented, but we already knew about how much we loved the game and how much we played it. What is historic is the attention that we earned, from both our "official" sponsors and arbiters, and those who support us on the secondary market. My peace of mind, in regards to the "fear" previously mentioned, rests in the large and growing community that we have, the exposure that it generates for everyone else, and the ever-increasing amount of tournament data for us, and them, to inspect and analyze.

[Smmenen]

What is clear is that Forsythe is doing what the DCI should be doing: they have a high threshold for restrictions as well as unrestrictions.

They are being nothing more or less than cautious.  This is a good thing.  I think it was pretty clear that they are in a position to continue to unrestrict, but they want to do it more slowly now that the cards aren't AS obvious as Earthcraft, etc.  I would expect them to continue to unrestrict cards.  This is a good thing.

On the restriction side, I think you'd have to be a moron to not realize that Workshop components are restrictable.  The question is one of line drawing: when shoudl it be done and what should be taken out.  Tournaments in the US have had 3-4 Workshop decks in every top 8 since Gencon, with the last one, SCG III having three in the top 4.  I would say that if Workshop decks at the Waterbury put up 5 in the top 8 and that trend continues through Feb, then Trinisphere will be the first component restricted.  Then we would start again to see what happens.

[dandan]

Vintage is THE format where you can use all* of your cards. Legacy isn't.

Saying that Portal should be banned in Vintage because another format is new is pretty flawed although it is probably the best argument against allowing it I've heard to date.

*Except Ante, manual dexterity and Un-cards

My post on Portal @ Starcity

Of course my thoughts are just speculation, but you have to consider first and foremost Wizards is a business.  They look at the long-term bottom line results, and the truth of the matter is that one can't make a business case that legalizing Portal will result in increased profits for Wizards, because:

1) The sets are all now long out of print; i.e., only the secondary market garners immediate profit.
2) Portal sets were intended as a "gateway drug" to the real cardboard crack.
3) The only people who want Portal legalized are already buying product - new customers increase profit margins, not established ones.

The only argument to the contrary is that Wizards should make an effort to appease their current dissatisfied customers,  which I think there simply aren't enough of to justify any effort on their part.  You also have to conider, in light of Forsythe's article, that they also regard the people who might become disgruntled by unrestrictions/unbannings.

Legalising Portal is pretty much a zero profit prospect. However Wizards have vastly improved their attitude to the Type I community and apart from the Portal issue I think the last 18 months have shown a bigger improvement in the fortunes of Vintage than anyone could possibly have imagined. Whatever the motivation (I honestly believe they actually care about the format, the cynics might say they care about their most loyal customers), Wizards are doing zero profit things to help Type I.

I've lost count of the times I've read Vintage - the format where you can use any of your cards on MagictheGathering.com. That is what Vintage is or at least, that is what it should be. That is why YawgWill and Academy are not banned. Letting us use our cards is what our format is all about and that is why Portal must be allowed.

[krakcer]

Well I must say all of my questions have been replied to. It is good to hear some Vintage experts say that the DCI is treating Vintage players with more respect and at least getting more attention they deserve. I'm highly considering quiting the Type 2 format and play mostly Vintage, and the worlds you all have spoken has made my Vintage future something worth looking into. I appreciate all of your responses.

[Necropotenza]

Huh? This seems pretty insane to me, really.

I think that this refers to the watch list. When I talked to AF at SCG VA 2: Electric Boogaloo, he said that they've got a list of cards that comes up every time. These include Drain, Shop, Bazaar, and Welder right now.

At least Brainstorm wasn't restricted like the forumites on SCG wanted!

What I wanted to say is that Vintage is NOT Vintage anymore without Drain, Shop, Bazaar, and Welder, etc. and that I find that having 12 cards in a watch list is not what Vintage needs. In my opinion there's only one card worthy of restriction, which should be in their watch list: Trinisphere.

[jpmeyer]

A "watch list" is really, really pointless in Vintage since more or less every card that gets played is potential "watch list" material because of the extremely high overall power level.

[Necropotenza]

@JP: you expressed exactly what I wanted to say. English is not my first language

[Ric_Flair]

::Brushes off dust::  I haven't talked in a while.  I have been observing.

Anyway, I think that again, Magic in the Rosewater era, did the right thing and unrestricted something and that was it.  I think Wizards has a sort of innate caution when it comes to restricting and banning cards.  This is a good thing.  I think, however, they need a sliding scale.  Block and Standard have been AWFUL for years now.  They just suck beyond belief.  One deck and the anti that deck have been the set up since Odyssey.  They need to be more liberal in smaller formats with their actions.  The cards cost less, there is less of an outcry from collectors, the formats are more easily dominated and so on.  Some of these are proper considerations and some are not, but I think they all factor into Wizards thinking.  

Ideally the attitude towards restriction would fit into this rubric:

Block and Standard are like amateur wrestling, tight technical grappling where all the parameters, like weight and height, need to be controlled carefully in order to have a good fair match.

Extended is like UFC, lots of power and damage, but still weight classes and the like.  

Vintage, in this analogy, is Thunderdome (two men enter, one man leave).  Throw two poor bastards in there, let em beat the hell out of each other, and whatever happens, happens, for the most part.

They need to really look at having a more nuanced format based approach.  The artifact lands are ridiculously weak in comparison to most of the cards on the lists in other formats, but in Standard they are insane.

[martyr]

Can you imagine how elite the Vintage format would be if nothing were banned/restricted? I think part of the problem is that people are shying away from starting Vintage because to be competitive at the mid-/higher-levels you have to invest quite heavily in it. Restricting cards that are good as 4-ofs and not so spectacular as 1-ofs would not only slow the format down dramatically, it would allow and encourage more people to play the format.

For example, what if Mana Drain were restricted? Would people still play it in control, and risk the mana burn for the chance to have a free second or third turn Fact or Fiction, or would they change their manabase to be more Wasteland/Man-land based and run Mana Leak instead?

Bazaar wouldn't be the cornerstone of Dragon, but it would be included, and be a bomb, in Madness, Dragon, and other wierd decks that can take advantage of it.

Mishra's Workshop wouldn't power aggro-artifact-prison decks with the consistency it does now, but it would still be an auto-include, and be a powerful tool for them.

I think as long as Combo is kept in check by making sure that the cards that put it over the top are removed from the format, I would favor restricting cards that aren't seriously being considered for restriction.

For the sake of the format, I'd rather lose some money on a set of Bazaars and let more people have access to them and still keep my decks competitive than clutch them to my breast like a petulant child whenever someone suggests that maybe they're too powerful. Same thing with Workshops, Drains, and any other card that was printed in such small numbers as the early power cards.

[Komatteru]

Can you imagine how elite the Vintage format would be if nothing were banned/restricted? I think part of the problem is that people are shying away from starting Vintage because to be competitive at the mid-/higher-levels you have to invest quite heavily in it. Restricting cards that are good as 4-ofs and not so spectacular as 1-ofs would not only slow the format down dramatically, it would allow and encourage more people to play the format.

For example, what if Mana Drain were restricted? Would people still play it in control, and risk the mana burn for the chance to have a free second or third turn Fact or Fiction, or would they change their manabase to be more Wasteland/Man-land based and run Mana Leak instead?

Bazaar wouldn't be the cornerstone of Dragon, but it would be included, and be a bomb, in Madness, Dragon, and other wierd decks that can take advantage of it.

Mishra's Workshop wouldn't power aggro-artifact-prison decks with the consistency it does now, but it would still be an auto-include, and be a powerful tool for them.

I think as long as Combo is kept in check by making sure that the cards that put it over the top are removed from the format, I would favor restricting cards that aren't seriously being considered for restriction.

For the sake of the format, I'd rather lose some money on a set of Bazaars and let more people have access to them and still keep my decks competitive than clutch them to my breast like a petulant child whenever someone suggests that maybe they're too powerful. Same thing with Workshops, Drains, and any other card that was printed in such small numbers as the early power cards.

See, you forget that brokenness is part of the draw of our format.  I, for one, like playing with powerful cards--the best cards, and know that I am rather not alone.  It kills me when I build a deck in standard have to include a suboptimal card because it is the best thing available in the pool of less than 1400 cards (1100 at the moment), the overwhelming majority of which are designed for limited formats (or casual play) and will never see action in a tournament.  For example, until Hinder was printed, if I wanted a card that counters a spell (for less than the outrageous price of 4 mana), I had to settle for Mana Leak and Condescend, both of which do not always counter a spell.  All I wanted was boring old Counterspell, but I don't get to choose that option.  In Vintage, I can choose the best card available for the job, and that's probably the biggest appeal of our format.  However, if I want to play with the best cards, I have to let everyone else do the same thing.  I met a person who was vehemently opposed to Power, calling it "retarded" and saying it should be banned.  When I suggested that he play the new Legacy format, he was like "Well, I don't want to give up Balance and Mind Twist."  Clearly that's a case of someone wanting to play his best cards but not wanting everyone else to play theirs, because theirs are a little more powerful than his.  The thing to remember is that our format is the format of unfairness, but everyone gets to do it.  The DCI only needs to take action when one deck or archetype is doing something grossly more unfair than what everything else is doing.  That's right: unfair.  Our format is the format of unfairness.  Every deck seeks to do something horribly unfair and gamebreaking.  Make it so you never get to control your own turn again?  Completely lock you by turn 3?  Win the game on turn 1 or 2?  None of that is fair.  It's a little different from playing some creatures and then attacking for a bunch of damage.  While other decks in other formats maybe too powerful for their enviornment, the decks do not run on a fundamentally unfair concept.  Affinity winning on turn 4 may not be fair, but it win by playing more high-quality threats than can be dealt with.  Reanimating an Akroma on turn 1 may not seem fair, but it, again, goes back to creature beatdown.

I agree with Kowal that the paragraph in the article was pretty pathetic, but I agree with the action.  Nothing is too more unfair right now than anything else.  That might change in the next few months, but right now, nothing in our format is too bad for us.

Well said, Ric.  I agree that not doing something in Standard seems like a mistake.  Even if they banned something and it didn't work perfectly, I think some action would have made most people a lot happier than they are now.  At least it would serve as an admission that one deck is a little too strong and we know that something needs to be done.  The happiness of Standard players is the most important in Magic, as Standard is the bulk of the game.  If new players go to FNM and get trounced in 4 turns by someone with Affinity, it doesn't serve as a very good incentive to keep playing Magic.  It also doesn't serve as good PR to hear a significant group of players saying "I refuse to play T2 until Mirrodin rotates out."  Because Standard is the format of necessity for most players, while we all choose to play Vintage or Extended, it needs to be monitored a little more closely.  When you have a format that comprises the majority of players in the game, and a large number of those players are unhappy, something needs to be done to keep them happy, whether or not "evidence" supports it.  You cannot use Vintage style evidence as criteria for banning in Standard because the formats are way too different.

@dandan.
Sigh.  That's all I have to say about that.

[dromar]

I think they really should have banned disciple in Standard. As AF said, Raffinity would still be the most powerful, but I think knocking it down a notch just helps other decks have a chance. Maybe ravager will only win 60% instead of 75%. Cranial Plating is also ridiculous, but I think disciple is all they needed to restrict.

As for type 1, there are always and will always be people who think that all the good (but mostly just expensive) cards should be restricted. Basically, I'm talking about MWS. I don't own any workshops, and, unless they drop in price dramatically, I never will, but I think Vintage should never be without a few cards that are that powerful. Trinisphere is also a tough choice, but personally, I like trinispheres unique ability, and I don't think it's broken enough that proper metagaming can't handle it. Many people argue that Stax is so easy to play that any idiot could place well in a tourney with it, based solely on the power of MWS and Trinsiphere. That's completely wrong. They may be powerful, but they're not unbeatable, and it's been proven at almost EVERY tournament ever played, that idiots don't place well.

I also think that voltaic key should be unrestricted, and possibly MoM. Voltaic key because it's not competitive enough. MoM probably isn't good enough, but I'd be cautious because combos can come together unexpectedly, although Tendrils and Rector still have the advantage of not having an obscene casting cost for their win condition. Conclusively, though, it doesn't really matter if there are more unrestricted cards to put in the junk pile, but personally, I would like a short restricted list with a good argument backing up each card there. I'm definitely ok with WotC being cautious about it though. I wouldn't like it if they looked like idiots either.

[andrewpate]

I think that it would be appropriate to keep a listing of reasons for restriction next to each card on the list, one that is updated as the metagame changes (each B/R List announcement would also include changes in justifications).  If the DCI really can't come up with anything to say about a card, it's time to talk about it coming off.  Voltaic Key basically just untaps Mana Vault and Grim Monolith.  Decks that can use a pile of colorless mana well already have plenty of much more consistent ways to get it.  If there is some secret reason for it staying on there, we deserve to know it.