So I remember when there was a proposal about fixed orientation for blind and people rejected it in part because it wasn't method neutral. This got me thinkng more about the WCA's stand on slice moves; namely that they don't exist as independent manipulations of a single layer containing four edges and four edges, but rather two moves of opposite faces combined with a cube rotation. Because of this they count as two moves rather than one. This is a disadvantage to users of Roux not only in FMC but also in speedsolving. When a CFOPer fails to AUF properly there is a +2 penalty. However, if a Rouxer is off by an M2 the solve if DNF'd.
Overall I think this standpoint is a remnant of when cubes were so stiff you really couldn't independently turn an inner slice, but the change is now long overdue, not only because it logically makes sense but also because it is a disadvantage to Rouxers and a violation of method neutral regulations.
tl;dr: WCA should use STM as their official metric.
EDIT: after hearing the opinions of various people, I have reached the following conclusions:
I no longer support +2 for being off by an M slice, because I originally misunderstood the reasoning behind the regulation, and apparently most people disapprove of the existing regulation.
While I still believe STM is the most natural and logical metric, for whatever reason other people don't. Therefore this must be a matter of opinion, as reasoning has failed to convince people and I trust that a good portion of you at least are marginally open-minded.
My argument was based off the assumption that STM was the most logical metric, but if people don't agree with my assumption I can't hope to convince them of my conclusions.
I now understand why HTM is used, even if I still believe it's inferior.
As people were introducing things about handicaps for LBL and other things, let me say this:
Those "pseudo-arguments" were like this:
LBL is not effective (given)
It should be more effective in the interest of method neutrality
It should be given a handicap (conclusion)
My argument was as follows:
STM is more logical than HTM (given)
Some methods (mostly Roux) are hindered by the use of HTM rather than STM
This is unfair, because if logic were followed, the handicap would be gone and there would be more method neutrality
STM should be used (conclusion)
BUT, as I said since arguing that STM is more logical is a hopeless cause, I have given up the desire to convince others of my point of view.
Overall I think this standpoint is a remnant of when cubes were so stiff you really couldn't independently turn an inner slice, but the change is now long overdue, not only because it logically makes sense but also because it is a disadvantage to Rouxers and a violation of method neutral regulations.
tl;dr: WCA should use STM as their official metric.
EDIT: after hearing the opinions of various people, I have reached the following conclusions:
I no longer support +2 for being off by an M slice, because I originally misunderstood the reasoning behind the regulation, and apparently most people disapprove of the existing regulation.
While I still believe STM is the most natural and logical metric, for whatever reason other people don't. Therefore this must be a matter of opinion, as reasoning has failed to convince people and I trust that a good portion of you at least are marginally open-minded.
My argument was based off the assumption that STM was the most logical metric, but if people don't agree with my assumption I can't hope to convince them of my conclusions.
I now understand why HTM is used, even if I still believe it's inferior.
As people were introducing things about handicaps for LBL and other things, let me say this:
Those "pseudo-arguments" were like this:
LBL is not effective (given)
It should be more effective in the interest of method neutrality
It should be given a handicap (conclusion)
My argument was as follows:
STM is more logical than HTM (given)
Some methods (mostly Roux) are hindered by the use of HTM rather than STM
This is unfair, because if logic were followed, the handicap would be gone and there would be more method neutrality
STM should be used (conclusion)
BUT, as I said since arguing that STM is more logical is a hopeless cause, I have given up the desire to convince others of my point of view.
Last edited: