Really, this is so much theory that it doesn't even make sense. Did any of the sides even think out how it would play out when the first thread was started and what would happen?
What I think will happen the moment the first thread starts based on Gorms/artic_one's idea:
First person comes in: My pokemon X + concept 1 it will fulfil.
First person comes in: My pokemon X + concept 2 it will fulfil.
Second person comes in: My pokemon X + concept 1 it will fulfil.
Second person comes in: My pokemon X + concept 2 it will fulfil.
You can say all you want about having a good TL, but I don't care how you say it or what you say, but if we do pokemon first, even if it's pokemon + concept, we will have a huge amount of submissions. Now not only does the TL (and all members that want to seriously judge all concepts) have to go through all of them to scrap those that will not work, we might also end up with a lot of pokemon remaining. Because seriously, what defines a good pokemon/concept combo and what doesn't? Any pokemon that is viable to be evolved and has decent speed and SpA with a few special based moves could be called a special sweeper. This IS not a faulty concept and thus should not be deleted. You could say this for most of the submitted pokemon. Anyone that can use it's brain can submit something that will not be deleted.
So after a TL spent countless of hours, while still leaving countless of pokemon/concepts combos, then what?
And this is my most important question for this path: On what basis from here on out will be decided which pokemon is going to be involved?
Because let's just say we have a list of 20 pokemon left (and I think there are going to be waaaay more), and quite a few also have more than one concept, will we chose by pokemon or by concept? Or by having people giving a reasoning for their pokemon+concept combo as to why that would work best? All 20+ of them? And now let's just say we did work it out by pokemon+concept, going all the way down to 3 options because the other options all were less good than these 3. We could very well have 3 completely different pokemon left and 3 complete different concepts for them to fill. Now what would decide which pokemon is chosen?
And now my 2nd important question: Even if we have these 3 pokemon left, what would prevent us from chosing one only because we want that certain pokemon while there might be another pokemon that better suits the concept tied to that specific pokemon?
Let me illustrate with an example. Let's say that of the 3 concepts that passes, pokemon a, b and c were chosen with concept d, e and f respectively. Now let's say that pokemon a would be the most popular, both on pokemon and on concept. But what if pokemon g, not even submitted in all of the submission because we totally forgot about him outclasses a by far in the concept we tied to him? Or the other way around. What if we chose a with concept d while concept x would be a far better choice for that pokemon? Would pokemon a + concept d still win because we just like to see that pokemon being involved into that certain concept?
Now onto the concept first option, proposed by Hydrolphin:
In contrast to the previous option, when the first thread is opened, it wouldn't be a mess. I assume that once a concept is submitted, anyone else doesn't have to submit the same concept. The way I read it, the only reason why you have to write down names of pokes is to show that the concept is viable enough for a larger range of pokemon. The list does not mean that it's restricted to only that list. I assume that once a concept is chosed, we start brainstorming about a list of all pokemon that fit well in the concept and then followed by eliminating the ones that least fit the concept. This would be a lot more orderly than the first option.
My first issue though: Going by concept means that there will always be certain pokemon who fall decently in any concept and thus will not fall in any concept at all when the concept described is too specific. Yet, when the concept is too broad, we don't have anything to work on, because a lot of pokemon could viably fit that broad concept, so how would we then continue to eliminate the list of pokemon in that concept?
My second problem is also closely tied to this: What if we have a semi-strict to very specific concept and choose a pokemon to work with for that specific concept, when the pokemon chosed could viably also perform other roles/niches/concepts? Would that not just be screwing the potential of that pokemon over?
Let me illustrate:
Concept 1: Special sweeper with good movepool and a way to boost SpA. Found pokemon: 3. Of these pokemon, all 3 could possibly also fulfil another role/niche/concept just as well, if not better. (just all examples). This concept is too strict because we are basically screwing over the 3 pokes in this concept, because even though we want a special sweeper with a good special movepool and a way to boost SpA, if we would continue to evolve either of these 3 pokemon to make a special sweeper while not working on his other aspects in which that pokemon excels is wasting resources in my opinion.
So we broaden the concept: We want a special sweeper, period. We now have a (much) larger list, and in the end we might still be screwing over any of the pokes we choose because of other roles it might be able to perform besides a special sweeper. And the much larger list means it's also getting more work and less orderly.
Broaden the concept even further, by saying "we want a pokemon to evolve that can do things" (bullshit concept ofcourse, but just for the sake of the argument), we basically just went into the territory that this concept is even far worse than just picking any pokemon blindfolded first and gorms/artic_one's idea would work waaay better than that. Even though we now have the freedom to fully utilize any niche a pokemon can perform (omastar for one can become a good special sweeper, yet also has very good potential to be a spiker. By not fully focusing on the special sweeper part in the following process, we might decide to give him more bulk instead of more speed and SpA so that he could viably perform both roles well instead of just the sweeper role.), we now have a list of basically every pokemon to work from.
To be honest, after some thought, I decided to propose a third option for the entire process, actually combining the two (but still keeping the concept first).
Stage 1: See Hydrolphins post. Basically a pretty specific concept and have people list a few pokemon to illustrate that the concept is indeed viable.
Stage 2: Pokemon + Niches (Note: not concepts, but niches the pokemon could viably fulfil).
Some clarification:
Let's say we still chose "Special attacker + movepool + CM/Etc." as a concept: Let's say we also chose Espeon (screw the fact of him being an Eeveelution), Omastar and Persian. (just examples).
We now discuss the niches in which they can perform:
If we choose to evolve Espeon, we should keep in mind that it can: Baton Pass CM and Wish, it could viably become a sweeper, it could etc.
If we choose to evolve Omastar, we should keep in mind that it can: Be a spiker and offer team support, it could viably become a sweeper, it could etc.
If we choose to evolve Persian, we should keep in mind that it can: Be a lead with Technician/STAB boosted Fake Out and Hypnosis, it could viably become a sweeper, it could etc.
We choose a pokemon and while still keeping in mind that when evolving the thing, we want to emphasize the fact that we want a special sweeper, in the following stages, we should also keep it's niches in mind.
Stage 3 and on, see either Hydrolphins or Gorms/the_artic_one's posts, since I believe that everyone is quite on the same page on what steps should follow.
Basically after stage 2, the entire concept assesment to work from is Concept to fulfill + pokemon to evolve into that role + other niches to be aware of and possibly work on expanding as well.
I still say that concept should come first for the very simple fact of guidance, reducing a load of submissions and making people think of more than one pokemon if they want to see their pokemon evolved into a certain concept.
Anyway, even if this third option should suck for everyone, if you still can't answer the bold questions in this post, then how do you think your proposed process could work. So I encourage both sides to at least think of what kind of outcomes/consequences your process options have, because both have things that will cause problems and if those can not be worked out, we should at least chose the lesser of the two evils.