Talk:Viability Ranking/@comment-40157980-20190723181418/@comment-29393109-20190724170242

"I'm not the one who has to explain programs. Anyone can put forward himself and present his program."

That doesn't help in the slightest but okay.

"I'd start saying I didn't propose a ranking council. It will be time-expensive and almost useless, because like 95% monsters are right-ranked. But I suggest to edit and restore the ML Voting page, because right now it's useless and chaotic, with new rules to put a monster in a different rank. It will be MUCH more useful and it will take less time."

First of all, no, the number of Monsters that are ranked correctly is not even close to 95%, this Viability Ranking, as well as most pages of Monsters released before 2019, are very outdated and could use some polishing tbh. And the ML Voting Page would only make the ranking process more time-expensive and almost useless, if someone wants to nominate a change they can state what change they want to make (e.g. Furrius Robin S > B+) and explain why they think the change should happen (e.g. Furrius Robin should be moved down as he does not have any AOE skills, which is detrimental for an Attacker) and the Ranking Council would discuss it (assuming it's not something dumb like Cain to F, for example). This would be better than our current system as we'd have people knowledgeable about the game ranking Monsters and not some idiots who think Wasper is OP Rank worthy.

"you're polite (which is an hard quality to find here, isn't it Guil?😜)"

Okay so you're addressing A0496, then proceed to name drop me to try and lecture me about politeness, yeah name dropping isn't the most polite thing either bud.