About Ojama vs McM:
Firstly, while I agree with Ojama that he and McM have all the right to play with the rules they want (as long as the game follows ADV mechanics), I also understand some people being annoyed and thinking it is a big disrespect to other players expecting to watch a good ADV game between 2 great players in an another episode of their rivalry, and in the tiebreaker of the finals of a big team tournament, and they saw how both players had agreed to play the game with a rule that completely changes ADV meta, so it was not really an ADV OU game, it was like "something similar" to ADV OU. That does not justify Triangles overreaction tho, even if he has reasons to be annoyed by this.
Secondly:
we agreed to no spikes because we, and several other advers, are tired of playing this tier 100% centralized around spikes.
Im calling bs on this for different reasons:
a) Usage. In the last SPL, Skarmory was used in the 32.65% of the teams, Forretress in the 7.14% of the teams and Cloyster in the 4.08%. That means that less than 45% of the teams had Spikes, and that is ignoring the fact that Skarm + Forry have been used in the same team more than once. The same happened in the last Wcop. If the tier was heavily spikes centralized, or if everybody used "Skarm + GGar + TTar", this number would have been much higher.
Gengar usage wasn't also that high (30.6%), and there were 0 Dusclops
Also, people with great records have not used Spikes that much. For example, my team ended with a combined record in ADV of 8-1 using Spikes in 3 games, you have ended SPL with a 7-4 record using Spikes only once, and Asta only used Spikes once last Wcop when he ended 6-0. If cannot be a Spikes based meta if the players that win more have not used Spikes much.
b) Existance of strong counterplay: Magneton traps and kills the main Spikers, while Starmie + Claydol + Forry + Cloy can get rid of Spikes. Starmie can also destroy the main ghost, while TTar can also trap it. It is not like BW Spikes Magic Guard, where getting rid of Spikes was nearly impossible and Skarm had an item to avoid getting trapped by Magnezone. Also, in the last SPL 1/3 of the teams did not have a spinner of Magneton, and this is ignoring teams with Magneton + Spinner. In a heavily Spikes centralized metagame, nearly every team would try to go anti spikes, since there are strong spikes counter strats (Mag + Spin is for example a terrible MU for Spikes teams)
c) You could argue that "Spikes forces me to be prepared for them, and that means I have less options because I have to cover them". I could argue the same for a lot of things: Dugtrio makes mons Heracross or Raikou much harder to use and forces me to use modest ib in defensive bliss (or counter bold) instead of the better bulkier sets, Heracross forces me to use either Gengar or Salamence or Gyarados or at least Dugtrio, Gengar is really annoying for physical based teams and ferro teams and I have to use things like Pursuit TTar when I could run a better TTar set, etc
d) I dont think you thought about the consequences of a meta with no Spikes. Yes, building at first is fun, because you are removing an element of the game that restricts your team build (you dont have to worry about something as big as Spikes). However by experience in the tournaments I played with those rules back in the day, the metagame is mostly a stall fest because you have no way of punishing switchings, and with decent predictions you can easily heal mons like Swampert or Metagross. It is something that does restrict team building, but a Spikesless meta is worse than a Spikes meta.
Spikes is very strong in ADV OU, but saying the metagame is heavily Spikes centralized is going too far.