I did not see this article until the above post, but WOW, this article is full of unsubstantiated and factually incorrect claims.
For example:
"For Steve, Trinisphere was an acceptable restriction, as was Chalice of the Void, as was Lodestone Golem, but not Gush."
Wow, is this an inaccurate and false statement.
Just a few days before the restriction of Trinisphere, I was on record asserting that Trinisphere should not be restricted at that time:
http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/vintage/9021-What-should-Wizards-Restrict.html
What do you think should be restricted and what do you think will be restricted?
Stephen Menendian (Smmenen)
Should: Goblin Welder
Will: Nothing
Then, if you go back and listen to the podcast or read the old mana drain boards, I repeatedly and vocally opposed the restriction of Chalice of the Void.
Here's just one post example of that: http://www.archive.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=48138.msg667573#msg667573
If Chalice was actually the problem, then why was it allowed to exist for 12 years? It clearly was not the problem, to the extent that there was one, or it would not have been unrestricted all this time. Except the last 12 months and the first few months of its existence, there were few calls to restrict Chalice.
I suppose publishers will publish anything these days, but there are so many unsubstantiated and factually incorrect claims in this article, it's actually shocking.
