Right on, good post. I would include further arguments against socialist experiments like sbmm because it causes an artificial and forced form of gameplay performance equilibrium where most players that fall in the average joe range (which most players do) will begin to lose those high highs and low lows that really force those elicit human emotions that bind us to games and experiences. Lobbies will all look feel and play the same every day every game in short. Your gameplays will feel, play and progress exactly the same way every game. This is not a dynamic online multiplayer experience when you know what to expect every lobby every game... I want the element of danger when i queue .. .maybe ill run into some super elite lobby and have to adjust my playstyle and loadouts to see if i can hang.... or maybe you get that dream lobby and put up a monster gameplay.... you lose all of this with forced sbmm. Also, sbmm assumes everyone wants and plays the game for the same reasons, when this cannot possibly be true. I say, if you provide lobby leaderboards with player statistics and remove all forms of sbmm from matchmaking, you put the power back in the players hands. Then have the power to choose if they want to play in one lobby or leave and roll another. Choice is always better than being forced to play the game the way some studio thinks you should. You the player should be in control of your gameplay experience. Under the conditions i list above, if you choose to stay in a particular lobby you will have the knowledge that the game gave you the best possible connection, and did not have to compromise connection to protect you from the big meanies out there. With that, it is up to you, the player to make the most of the game, as it should be. Are we guardians or mice? Get out there with the WHOLE community and mix it up, only then do you know where you stand.