Maybe people feel differently than I do on this point, but I feel like there's a pretty large gap between MTG and SPL, one of the most glaring of which is the base format of the game. It's just hard to equate the two in my mind. SPL has an element of RNG to it which makes it closer to Hearthstone imo. That's a game I haven't played in years, but I remember the debate about Yogg-Saron in a competitive environment and how much RNG can exist in a game before it becomes inherently uncompetitive.

MTG tends to consign a lot of chance based effects to supplemental sets like Un- and Commander prebuilt decks, by contrast HS & SPL rest directly upon these same effects. Obviously, skill trends tend to emerge, which is what makes many players rank consistently high over multiple seasons. It does make me wonder about how much goes into SPL though, how and why bots are perceived to have such an advantage, how much player agency, how much money, how much RNG goes into each match.

Personally, I think the other proposal banning bots is more feasible, but I don't really think either are really possible to implement to a really effective degree. This is really my unprofessional opinion, and I haven't been super involved in the process like some people here, but I haven't even seen a discussion of what type of measures will actually be used to detect bots or what will happen to accounts that are determined to be botting. That should be solidified before we vote on something as bombastic as altering the TOS.

So far, much attention seems to be focused on public facing services that anyone can pick up and get involved with. In light of the amount of cooperation from the dev of one of these services in particular, it's pretty sad that they keep getting targeted like this. Tournaments can already have a flag that disallows battle helper. Modern is already free of the bot. This has all been possible due to the good faith. I'd like that process to receive some recognition.

Can the same be said for private bots though? How will bad faith actors be detected? Does the drive to run bots out of town extend further than this layer, or will it stop once the general public loses their access again? This is a commitment, and I expect it to be treated as such. The reason I have trouble believing that is the timing of this wave; we've had bots for years, but only once anyone can access them has this discussion begun for real. Those of us who fall under the banner of good faith have already divested ourselves of our tools. If this discussion is to continue, it's time to take a serious look beyond that.

Otherwise, this may as well be called the re-privatize bots and helpers proposal.