NOT

Hello,If you are not yet aware, sleep clause has been removed for gen 8 OU. Before I delve further into this, I would like to make a few key points.1) In terms of how this occurred: I thought something should be done and tagged chaos if it could be done. It was intended as more of a suggestive message rather than a command, but that was miscommunicated and that is something I apologize for. There should have been more public discussion prior to a site-wide change occurring.2) This is not some irreparable damage, and if there is good reason / support to reverse this then I imagine that will be done quickly. Alternatively if it is decided that sleep clause should be reinstated until this is settled then that's fine too.3) This should, IMO, be treated as a fresh discussion of "what's the best way to handle sleep in generation 8" rather than "should wesleep clauseas it is a new generation and nothing should be here because of history alone.4) I still support what was done from a policy perspective and will defend it as such and I hope people attempt to make genuine counterarguments limited to the scope of the policy itself and not what was done in the past.5) I amarguing that sleep itself is now totally balanced. I am arguing that if it is broken, we should take methods alternative to the previous sleep clause (such as just banning sleep moves).Now, let me get into the reasons why the old sleep clause should be done away with. Everyone knows that Smogon tiers are a certain degree removed from cartridge. Everyone also knows thatchanges have to be made to preserve competitiveness. Now, the real questions lie somewhere in the middle, and where we draw the line to maintain these ideals. We have accepted pokemon bans, move bans, species clause, etc. Generally, we stay away from altering the game mechanics - we either preserve something or remove it. Sleep clause is different in this sense because it outright alters game code to become possible (you can not, in any way, get this to occur on cartridge). For stuff like pokemon bans, the theoretical application and justification for this is that you can merely have two players agree to not use something, which is less removed when compared to a modification to the game's code. Additionally, there is no real significant metagame harm in removing the freedom of one time sleepers (think Amoonguss in past OUs), as it is not a huge or core component of a tier's makeup. This is also tackling gen 8 as a new stage, not changing something that has already existed like a past gen.I won't be able to cover all of the arguments wanting to preserve sleep clause as it is not my stance, but I will try. I believe the arguments can be summed up as some combination of "this is something that has been around for a while, if it's not broke don't fix it" and "we should fully value competitiveness over any semblance of being closer to cartridge." I would counter these by saying that it is broke because it crosses a certain threshold of distance from cartridge via code modification, and that in order to retain legitimacy you need to be similar to cartridge insense, and that where the line is drawn is difficult but must be done at some stage.Again, I apologize for the method in which this occurred but I hope we can all focus on arguing the policy itself at this point and come to an agreement about what is best for the tiers we all value. Cheers.