Our experiences are different then, or maybe we’re talking about different points in time, or different subreddits. There are strictly competitive subreddits, which aren’t going to feature (or even tolerate) conversations outside of tips, tricks, strategies etc. Then there’s more general subreddits where these kinds of conversations are allowed. Guess it comes down to which ones you’re talking about. In my experience, the general subreddits where progression conversations took place were not civil, mature, or open-minded. And how civil one thinks the FOX news or MSNBC youtube comments sections are, for example, is going to have a lot to do with your political ideologies.
Also, are you saying that anyone who thinks the game is rigged is part of a conspiracy theory? And if so, why?
Again, is the implication that anyone who disagrees is doing so on the basis of emotion? I’ve straddled the fence between both sides of this argument, and I think there’s valid points to be made on either side. But neither side has seen the code, and neither side has provided conclusive evidence. That skill “solves” climbing doesn’t invalidate any and every claim that the matchmaker has problems (I’m not saying that you’re saying it does, but this is not an “open and shut” case).
People rally around Taleswapper as the final say on this, but he isn’t: all he’s done is present generalities about how sorting algorithms can be written and then makes the highly questionable leap to “that’s how they’ve been written here.”
I retracted my post on this topic when I made the same (egregious) mistake of suggesting that general matchmaking theory best practices had found their way into into Overwatch – with absolutely no evidence that this was the case. This is like advocating that every doctor is a good one because SOME take the Hippocratic oath seriously. This is a category error.
To be clear, you’re suggesting that every criticism of the matchmaker is either flawed or emotional? How do you qualify an emotional argument? It would seem to me that most (if not all) of the arguments you’re referring to as emotional are just standard issue abductive reasoning. I’m not even sure what an “emotional argument” is now that I think about it. Whether an argument is effusive or not has no bearing on whether it’s right or wrong. Beyond expressing it emotionally or not, underlying claims are still being made, and those are judged on the basis of whether they’re valid/sound.
I haven’t posted there on the general Overwatch forums. I found the lack of moderation, immaturity, and tribalism there to be a problem; not to mention that it was mostly a breeding ground for bad Mercy fan art. And Competitive Overwatch and Overwatch University, et al, aren’t places where matchmaking can be discussed much without being off-topic.
Whether something is “incorrect” or not is not an excuse to be rude and disrespectful. And the category of what’s “objectively true” about matchmaking which goes above and beyond opinion or confidence or belief is small. There’s a lot of speculation taking place on both sides.
To me there is no question which side of this debate is more aggressive and rude. Typically it goes something like this:
Scenario 1:
Upset Person A experiences something in the game that tilts them. They come to the forum with complaints and theories about the situation. Those posts are swarmed upon by people that disagree with them. They’re often insulting and personally demeaning, and they’re placed into this category of generally delusional, lazy, conspiratorial or senseless. People attack these people not as a new person entering this arena, but as an extension of all the other people they’ve rolled around in the mud with. Person A is attacking the game, and then people attack THEM. Those people get defensive having been insulted, and they respond in kind.
In fact, Taleswapper is maybe the only person on these forums who seems to have a standard of behavior below which they will fall (and he deserves a ton of credit for that).
Scenario 2:
Someone who’s smurfed or hardcore grinded their way to rank X makes a post on the forums offering that this situation proves that anyone who criticizes the matchmaker is a hardstuck “copium” addict. The gauntlet having being thrown (which reminds, check out Ridley Scott’s “The Last Duel” – awesome movie) people get defensive and the predictable ensues.
I have never seen anyone rudely attack Taleswapper or anyone else like him who calmly and respectfully tries to explain how the matchmaker works in fact-based way.
I think there’s some justification for spending time here to write and debate, so it’s not all just an egregious waste of time (I’m honestly way more bitter about all the hours spent playing Overwatch). I credit this place with me A) doing a hell of a lot more writing and proofreading than I otherwise would have and B) getting me into a fairly common routine of analyzing my own arguments and reasoning and that of others. It’s clear you do the same, so cut yourself some slack. 
I honestly think you’ve become a better writer and communicator since first knowing you, and I think I have too. Not that either of us were bad before, but there have been a lot exchanges that forced me to think through my arguments (and yours and others) and there’s no way that all that time and practice doesn’t come with improvements. I think you, Basil, Tale, Cuth, Rigged (I know you’ll disagree on this one), myself, and others have elevated the level of discourse on this topic, or at least we routinely present arguments that take time and effort to respond to and unpack.
We all do it. We have a strong internal sense of what’s true and what’s right and wrong, and we seek out information that confirms it, all while being less “moved” and impressed with information that doesn’t fit our worldview. No one likes to be wrong.
Most subreddits just aren’t a good place for open discussion unless it’s a fairly neutral one, or debate and discussion is the reason it exists. People come to Overwatch related forums wanting to express their opinion, and what they get is immediate, withering confrontation. And it has a chilling effect on other people who see that. And like I said, the way Reddit is run makes it very very easy (if not inevitable) for tribes, groupthink, and hive minds to form. Then those places form an immune system around any dissenting opinion that passes through.
There’s no question that shutting up, and “getting after it” is the superior option when it comes to accomplishing the goal. Life isn’t fair and at the end of the day, people content to merely complain don’t get very far. Overwatch, like so much else, has a tipping point: a critical moment where enough small changes eventually produce a large or irreversible effect. I think anyone with a given mindset about the game (or life in general) is going to, commendably, meet that tipping point, or that line in the sand wherever it is (and in this context, it’s how good should you have to be to get out of, say, gold, and again, keep in mind that people are comparing OW to their other life experiences, ones where there is no Blizzard designing the landscape, and those real-life experiences strongly informs their opinions on what’s fair and what isn’t).
But there is a conversation about where that line/tipping point should be. You combine this with the – indisputable, objective fact – that Blizzard does have some say over where that line falls, and there’s certainly a valid conversation to be had about whether the placement is correct. That’s just the nature of life on this planet: any decision is going to be open to question and criticism.
Group A: “meet the line wherever you find it.”
Group B: “the placement of this line is ridiculous.”
Like you said, it’s going to come down to some reasonable middle ground.
You’re right, and apparently the community doesn’t much agree, lol. But it’s weird because it’s like asking people who are out of work and suffering vs. those who are employed and comfortable what their views on unemployment benefits are (aka identity politics).
As for developers (or any business really) and what they’re trying to do: It’s a spectrum really. Some are more than happy to exploit people any way they can, and it becomes a very “us” vs “them” mentality. Others see business as more of a symbiotic relationship where the goal is for both parties to flourish as much as possible.
I don’t think the gaming industry is generally on the correct side of that spectrum (which is often the case when you have shareholders, because exploitation is profitable in the near term, and people often don’t care much about the long term – they’ve already cashed out their chips by then).
p.s.
I can’t believe how absurdly stupidly long this. I only really see how long the post is after I hit “save.” It doesn’t seem like much while I’m writing it. Ridiculous.