Why do Some Argue Against Skill Based MM?

Mojo_Riesing, on Jul 28 2021 - 19:51, said:
I've stipulated all along, though maybe not in every post, the "math" is correct.  I've also said statistics are only as good as the sources they are drawn from. This is incorrect. It doesn't matter who it comes from, what matters is the methodology. You are, again, trying to set up a "it's all biased so let's throw it all out" position.   I've also said that even allowing all of that to be correct, and lets just say they are, it's how we INTERPRET statistics that matters or is the problem. It's only a problem if it is done incorrectly.   I'd point out to you that while math is generally considered a pure science, statistics don't share that same distinction.

Neato, who has skill in these matters, still come thru with statements that indicate bias. Just because a person has opinions on things, doesn't mean the interpretations are biased.    That's ok, we all have bias but it moves you away from impartial truth to something else. It's moving away from the "scientific method" as well which I'm not sure you actually understand. I understand the scientific method just fine. If you think having opinions invalidates it, it is you who does not understand it.

It's like asking a political  question to assess statistically what people think about an issue.  Will it matter if the pollster is known to definitively in this or that political party or camp? No, what matters is the methodology (the wording of the questions, the area polled, even the order of the questions, etc). This is completely independent of party.   Conservative pollster or Liberal poster. Will you believe them both, or lean towards the one whose position you most agree with?  If they agree it's irrelevant. If their polls don't agree, then you look toward the methodology to see if you can figure out why there is a difference.   It's ok, because this is what people do all the time, including here.  What i've been saying here most recently is using a numbers solution to an emotional controversy hasn't been working and probably wont...ever. It's not an "emotional controversy." It is a failure of people to understand the nature of evidence.    Clearly MANY people feel MM is "unfair" and many point to skill.  SOME feel it is unfair. MANY think the MM is broken because of things that are not related to MM (quick battles, blowouts, their lack of success at the game, etc). They just lack the ability to understand this fact.    You see that "feeling" expressed in these Forums and often in chat while in game.   If you roll a 6 sided die 8 times, which sequence is less likely to occur? A. 3, 2, 5, 6, 4, 6, 6, 3 B. 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1 Most people will tell you B is less likely, but they are equally probable. More people believing something doesn't change reality. Reality doesn't care about your feelings or what you want.

Again, i do see issues for any form of SBMM though some more and some less.  I don't see any as "fatal" to the game, or even catastrophic.  I'm kind of personally ambivalent about how skills fit into MM and feel map design and Tier inclusion in MM are more significant matters to consider in re-working MM. That's my solution for you, forget about how skills work in MM and fix the other easy stuff first.  Other than that, i don't have to prove a darn thing at your command, because like most here, i'm contributing opinions and you being snarky about it is no incentive to do otherwise.  Acting like you don't have a stake in the topic doesn't exempt you from having to back up you position that Neato's conclusions are biased. You are making an assertion, and it is clearly one you can't back up.

So far as being tired, well, no one makes you come back here do they?