[IAmBatman]

This definitely isn't a thread about calling anyone out or saying anyone is unworthy. It's about what it takes to hold the project together in the future and the standard we need to set ourselves for the future.
If we add a hero, don't we want to add a hero who will do some of the heavy lifting (playtesting) on a regular basis? And can we really hold that hero to that standard if we're not holding ourselves to that same standard?
There's also the idea of what it takes to make an informed vote. Theoryscaping is great, but I can say for a fact that I have learned so much about what we do, what makes a card work, what it's like to balance something for these sets, and so on, just from playing with the figures on a regular basis. I may be biased, but I truly believe that a vote from a regular playtester on a design or costing matter is so much more informed than the vote of a non-playtester or mere theoryscaper. This even holds true for someone who's recently playtested an entirely different unit, because they're still active in the game, still getting a feel for these customs on a regular basis.
Don't we want our voters - our major decision makers - to be informed voters and decision makers?