Who is your favorite WotC staff writer?

[Machinus]

This poll only covers articles written by authors currently on staff, and does not include guest authors like Brian Tinsman or Scott Johns. I am interested in knowing who is everyone's favorite author.

Please base your vote on several categories. In regards to magic as a whole, consider:

- relevance of articles
- writing skill, technique, and style
- your interest level in content of discussions and issues
- your satisfaction with policies and philosophy of author

Discussion of this topic is fine, but please consider the criteria I have listed.

[EDIT: After I have a reasonable number of votes I will add a post about who I picked and why.]

[Nefarias]

Forsythe loses some points on the first criteria, is average in the second, but really shines in the last two, and the third in particular. The only articles I read nowadays are Rosewater's and Forsythe's all the time, Flores some of the time, and Alongi and David-Marshall very rarely.

To me, your third criteria is the most important, followed closely be the fourth. Tey could have Shakespeare and Steven King writing for the site, but if all they talk about is how to make pre-cons less crappy and building awful junk-rare decks, I'm not going to read them. I think Gottlieb and Alongi are great writers, but their subjects just don't interest me. I really like they way Gottlieb thinks of some crazy decks, and when I played casual, Alongi was my favorite writer on there, but now they hold little relevance. I keep trying to read the Wills' articles to try to get back into Limited, but it never works (and I don't think his writing is that amazing anyway). I don't play MTGO, so Bennie is useless, and those precon remakes are a waste of time. Carter is actually a pretty good writer too, and makes it more interesting than Rune Horvik did, but I'm very lucky to get one thing I didn't know out of them.

If all of them wrote about Vintage or Magic history and policy and the like, my pick would probably be different, but I like that both Rosewater and Forsythe are the only writers on the internet that can give you the info that they do, whereas there are probably 50 or more writers that can suggest what deck you take to Regionals. He also seems to care a bit more about Type 1 than any other, which helps.

[Jacob Orlove]

Not only did Rosewater write that "elegance" article, but he's apparently also voting a confirmed, unrepentant, lifetime cheater into the Hall of Fame. A few articles about vintage in the past are nowhere near enough to get me to read his stuff anymore.

Forsythe, though, writes the occasional article on b/r changes and the like, and those I actually read. He gets my vote.

[Machinus]

I expected most people to vote for rosewater and forsythe, because those are the only two writers I read. But forsythe is by far the better. I am surprised that so many people agree with me about that.

Forsythe talks about fundamental magic theory as well as card design and power. He also gives us the most attention out of any writer, by talking to us about design and restrictions for type 1. He might be the only writer who has dedicated multiple paragraphs to vintage (see the week after march 1st). As well, his ideas and attutude towards magic seems to resonate with the philosophy of vintage players. This makes all his articles enjoyable, which is considerable, since he doesn't write about vintage.

[Dr. Sylvan]

I like Forsythe a lot, but I voted for Rosewater here. The "When Cards Go Bad" article won me over years ago. I think it's possible he loves the game more than anyone else alive, and it shows.

[Komatteru]

I like Forsythe a lot, but I voted for Rosewater here. The "When Cards Go Bad" article won me over years ago. I think it's possible he loves the game more than anyone else alive, and it shows.

I agree.  I also voted for Maro.  I really loved his articles on the design mistakes present in Urza's Block.  Some of the comments he made on stuff like Memory Jar, Yawgmoth's Will, etc. in this article.

[Mykeatog]

I check the website everyday, but I only have a garunteed read on Monday and Friday.

I know that this Mike Long thing has been subject of alot of debate all over the net - and I do agree that cheating is wrong, but the fact is very few us were on/paying attention to the Tour back in the early days, and we really don't know what went on as far as actual skill. Maro cares deeply about the game, and on a weekly basis is telling stories that cross the whole plane of reference of magic. It is because of this that I can't disagree with his choice of Mike Long. I'm very good at drawing horrible comparison's - and I have one here too...

Thomas Jefferson (Declaration of Independence Author) had Slaves. Slaves are bad. Should his name not sit upon the pedastool that we hold Washington, and Adams to?

I understand that slavery was accepted, and cheating never was - but if both of the two author's whose opinions matter to me are in favor of it - then let the sheep be moved by the shepard, I'm in.

Back on Topic, I do find some of the normal weekly stuff good, but I couldn't see any of the other weekly columnists having as much of an impact on my reading as when I realize there is a new Maro or Double-A article.

[jcb193]

As much as i can't stand the self-promotion juggernaut that is Mark Rosewater, his articles are well thought out, relevent to almost everyone at some point, and fun, enjoyable reads.  That said, i would love to edit out his facade of self-deprecation. 

Josh

[Bardo]

In descening order of interest:

1. Flores
2. Forsythe
3. Rosewater

I'll always check to see what these guys are writing about, and will read them if they're talking about a somewhat interesting topic (as opposed to the Hall of Fame, which I couldn't give two tugs less about).

The rest of their writing staff is just bad or irrelevant.

But, generally speaking, the average TMD forum dweller is not the target demographic for mtg.com. I think their primary reader-base are kids who play T2 and MODO, since that's where WoTC derives their profits. If Wizards were dependent on the average T1 player, who buys singles off eBay and trades foils on MOTL, they would have gone out of business long ago.

But if I were using your criteria Machinus:

relevance of articles: Forsythe; runner up: Rosewater
writing skill, technique, and style: Flores; runner up: Rosewater
your interest level in content of discussions and issues: Forsythe
your satisfaction with policies and philosophy of author: Forsythe

But even though Forsythe comes up on top using this as a guide, Flores still gets my vote.

[Nightfall]

I'm interested in most non-casual formats, so I read all the articles that fit in there.  I love Mike Flores.  I love that each week I get two columns from him.  He normally writes the most interesting and well thought out articles.  His SCG articles are better, but I still enjoy his official site ones.

[Ephraim]

I tend to get more useful information out of Forsythe's articles, but anybody around here who knows me at all knows that I thrive on card design. I soak up every word that MaRo writes, whether it's useful or not, because he's writing about a topic that fascinates me more than just about any other topic in Magic (probably including deck building or even playing the game.)