If Poe Were Gatekeeping: A Field Guide to What It Would Look Like (and Why That’s Not What He’s Doing)

“Gatekeeping” = restricting access, voice, or legitimacy. If Poe were truly gatekeeping, you’d see walls, purity tests, blacklist culture, and pressure to conform or get exiled. What you actually see from Poe is the opposite: labeled options, transparent standards, and a call for multiple play-lanes so everyone can enjoy the game without stepping on anyone else.

1) First, define the word we keep throwing around

Gatekeeping isn’t “having an opinion,” “wanting quality,” or “caring about authenticity.”
Gatekeeping is controlling the gate—who speaks, who belongs, which ideas are allowed—by using status, access, or social pressure to block participation.

Short test: If someone’s position removes options or voices, it leans gatekeeping. If it adds clearly labeled options and pushes for transparency, it leans standards.

2) If Poe were gatekeeping, here’s what you would actually see

A) The Structural Stuff

Purity Tests for Participation
“If you didn’t spar 200 rounds, your opinion is invalid.”
Gate vibe: credentials > arguments.
One-Lane Only
“My way or no way.” No Casual, no Hybrid—only Sim.
Gate vibe: collapse variety to protect status.
Blacklist Culture
Quiet DMs, shared lists, and group pressure to freeze out “non-believers.”
Gate vibe: social access as a weapon.
Narrative Policing
Threads shut down unless they mirror the preferred talking points.
Gate vibe: control the conversation, control the reality.
Opaque Rule Cards
He demands changes but hides the rule set, terms, and metrics.
Gate vibe: keep the rulers fuzzy so the rulers stay in charge.

B) The Day-to-Day Tells

Moving Goalposts
When evidence arrives, the standard shifts so opponents never “qualify.”
Status-First Rebuttals
Replies start with “Who are you?” rather than “Where’s your data?”
Platform Conditionality
Access to spaces/panels/podcasts depends on agreeing in advance.
Win-State Monopolies
“If my lane isn’t the ranked lane, your wins don’t count.”
Shaming Over Shaping
“You’re the problem,” instead of “Let’s label lanes and let people opt in.”

If you regularly saw even half of the above attached to Poe’s approach, that would be gatekeeping.

3) What communities look like under real gatekeeping

Silence from the middle: Casual players don’t speak; sim fans don’t debate—they posture.
Feature freeze: Devs optimize for whoever holds the mic, not for clarity or breadth.
Ossified metas: Without transparent rule cards, balance is rumor-based, not data-based.
Talent drain: Thoughtful people leave because nuance keeps getting punished.

4) What Poe actually does (receipts > rhetoric)

Poe’s consistent pattern:

Three clearly labeled lanes:
- Casual/Assisted – generous stamina, forgiving defense, faster tempo
- Hybrid/Standard (ranked) – balanced assists, familiar pacing
- Sim/Discipline – manual defense/footwork, realistic stamina & damage
  With separate MMR/leaderboards and public rule cards.
  Anti-gate vibe: Adds choices, doesn’t delete them.
Transparency as policy:
Push for published stamina curves, damage models, defensive windows, and assist settings so players see how the game plays before queuing.
Anti-gate vibe: Sunlight > status.
Receipts-first arguments:
Footwork values, stamina decay, punch economy, and defensive layers framed with testable outcomes (“reduce infinite spam by rewarding positional discipline”).
Anti-gate vibe: Show your work.
Open door to Casual & Hybrid:
The point isn’t “remove Casual”; it’s “label it, celebrate it, and keep it from invalidating Sim.”
Anti-gate vibe: Pluralism with boundaries.

5) The “Am I Gatekeeping or Setting Standards?” quick check

Ask of any post—Poe’s or anyone’s:

Does this add options or remove them?
- Add = Standards; Remove = Gatekeeping.
Are the rules public and testable?
- Public = Standards; Opaque = Gatekeeping.
Does it protect space for people who disagree?
- Protected space = Standards; Social punishment = Gatekeeping.
Is the ask about behavior of systems or worth of people?
- Systems = Standards; People = Gatekeeping.
Would a new player know how to opt into their fun?
- Clear on-ramps = Standards; One true way = Gatekeeping.

6) What “Poe-as-Gatekeeper” would actually sound like (it doesn’t)

“Casual should not exist.”
“If you haven’t fought, sit down.”
“Only our lane counts for ranks.”
“We’ll keep our slider math private.”
“Disagree in public and you won’t get a platform.”

If you don’t hear those notes, you’re not hearing gatekeeping—you’re hearing product design boundaries.

7) Why standards ≠ snobbery (and why games need them)

Standards are not a velvet rope; they’re labeled rails. They let:

Casual players get frictionless fun without stamina nightmares.
Hybrid players enjoy competitive pacing without sim’s strict discipline.
Sim players get the craft they came for without arcade exploits leaking in.

That’s not exclusion. That’s traffic lanes so everyone arrives safely.

8) A constructive path forward (what anyone can do today)

For players/creators

Argue with models, not people: “Here’s a stamina curve that stops spam while keeping volume boxing viable.”
Post before/after clips with rule cards on-screen.
Advocate for lane-specific leaderboards and public sliders.

For devs

Ship rule cards for each lane (stamina, damage, assist levels, defensive windows).
Tie ranked to the lane that represents the game’s intended core, while honoring separate rankings elsewhere.
Publish telemetry summaries (e.g., average punch volume per round by lane, KD rates, energy deltas).
Run structured betas: one variable at a time, documented.

9) The bottom line

If Poe were gatekeeping, you’d feel doors closing. Instead, he’s arguing for more doors, clearly labeled, so Sim doesn’t erase Casual, Casual doesn’t drown Sim, and Hybrid has a real home. That’s not a gate; that’s a map.

Call it strict if you want. Call it opinionated. But if the proposal adds choice, publishes rules, protects debate, and keeps scoreboards honest, it’s not gatekeeping—it’s good product design.

Poe’s Think Tank

Friday, September 5, 2025