sometimes you set out to make a youtube thumbnail and get lost in the sauce

This is so impossible to respond to without naming names, so apologies, but I'll use an example from my own region. You may be selective about the panelists, but it's very unclear from the outside what the criteria are. "Zedreo" has been a panelist for multiple years and is apparently from Alberta. However, the only Melee tournament he's seemingly EVER entered on start gg was Self-Fights 1, a private Melee Stats online event. I've even asked multiple Alberta TOs and players about him and nobody has ever met the guy. This is not meant to be shade at him specifically- he may be a great balloter, I genuinely have no idea. And it's also not to say that you need to be an active player to be able to put together a good ranking. But when this is their sole connection to the scene it invites a lot of skepticism and doubt about their relationship to the Melee community and their understanding of the context of the data they're parsing, and I don't think it creates a lot of confidence in the final product when none of this is particularly transparent. It's already a bit of a conflict of interest that the balloters largely sit in the Melee Stats discord and casually come to rankings consensuses throughout the year prior to the balloting period, but it's especially concerning when people like Mario H or even Etossed, who have historically been clearly very passionate about results and rankings and who have submitted test ballots in the past, have been seemingly thrown out for not closely mirroring that consensus opinion. It makes people wonder whether the balloting system is promoting accuracy, or the echoing of those consensus MS opinions. I think that, at the very least, being more transparent about the ways that someone can become a balloter and what their responsibilities actually entail would be a great step in communicating that the rankings are a product of the efforts of people who are currently passionate and knowledgeable about the scene. Balloters who haven't been in or around the scene for several years but who still have a ballot, while actively passionate people who are not in the Melee Stats social circles are seemingly excluded, reinforce the outside impression that the rankings are a representation of the community through a Melee Stats community lens rather than a reflection of the Melee community as a whole. I know the original tweet is now deleted, and not to speak on their behalf, but I think this is to the point that they were trying to make. The point isn't that you let "anyone" be a balloter, it's that the criteria for having a ballot are unclear, and seems to value being a part of Melee Stats more than part of Melee.

I'm not a fan of this change at all, and vocalized my concerns privately to members of the Melee Stats team when the rankers nearly made this change last year. I appreciate that this is in response to fewer events happening in the first half of the year in 2026, but it's also a decision being made prior to BoBC, a major still yet to take place in the first half of the year that will undoubtedly create more meaningful data. An alternative solution would be broadening the ranking-eligible events to include major prelocals, which would effectively double the amount of cross-region h2h data without depriving 20 players of the opportunity to be recognized for their efforts, and also make it much easier for players to meet the activity requirements without breaking the bank on travel. The optics of downsizing from a top 50 to a top 30 are just not great- it implies that the game is shrinking. 50 or 100 players on a ranking have always been arbitrary thresholds that don't reflect ranges of skill or the number of players who are "good" at the game, and the lower spots on the top 100 have also always been pretty volatile. I don't think that that's an issue. When so many players set "getting ranked" as a huge goal, in the same way that players try to push to get on their local PR, I think that there's value in upholding those goalposts. I'm not suggesting that we broaden the top 50 or 100 to let everyone get a participation trophy or something, but when there's such a strong precedent for what the benchmarks are, I think that pulling that opportunity away from people is just missing the bigger picture, especially when there are alternative solutions. I think there are plenty of other solutions that would be preferable- a mid-year top 100 that includes the back half of 2025, delaying the mid-year ranking slightly to include more data, not aligning with the calendar year, or just running it and accepting that it'll never be perfect- and that's okay. I understand that the ranking team prioritizes the accuracy our their output, and I don't fault them for wanting to ensure that they're not effectively making up placings. But I do think that they're missing the forest for the trees with this one.

i explained privately last year why i felt this is a bad idea the ranking is more important to the players in the ~50s at this point and even if the list isn’t super accurate depriving players of the opportunity to reach it is upsetting

had a nice interview with mono if u havent seen yet :) promo ur stuff man @monotheon youtu.be/tJF81LPAio8?si=oPCg…

maybe aMSa was inside of us this whole time

my bad guys

NEED A VIDEO EDITOR FOR YOUR STREAM? whether its gaming or just chatting, or any crazy video production idea you have in mind, let me lend a hand and be your editor :) DMS OPEN!!! #Editing #Twitch

Didn't know Genesis was yesterday

Melee

Which 5 alphabetically adjacent players make the best crew? The A's and J's are pretty stacked imo

This is peak Melee 🗻

It wouldn't be world class Melee without world class talent to bless the mic 🎤 Tune into Nounsvitational 2025 December 6th & 7th

INTRODUCING FIRST TO 50 OPPONENTS FOR THE REST OF THIS WEEK @moky_dokie @LilTrickshot @KrudoKyle @monotheon

CINEMA