Question 4 (first because it concerns the relevance of the other questions): Yes, it is necessary and recruiters have been doing so for a long time. Maybe now it needs to be done a bit more drastically since we had a bit of a "boom" in the number of what used to be considered good replays.


Question 3 (because it gives a "why" to the previous question): The main thing we have been doing for the community is giving them a goal, and that gives people something to work for and improves the general quality of the replays as we've seen through times. In itself that's a good enough purpose.
Aside from that, I also think we should have a more active role on the community. In the past we used to host ORMO comps, and cover up for the GMs when they neglected big replay-making championships.
Now, the people who used to do that grew up and got busy and we're failing to do that job. That's an issue that, in my opinion, deserves a lot more attention.
One of the other purposes ORMO serves (or used to, but I like to think it still does) is passing on knowledge from successive generations. I remember being constantly baffled about the stuff NutHug and Nightin (only mentioned them because realism, duh) said about replays and learned a lot with that. Plus, this org was pretty much how I met everyone.


Question 1: It is fair. People were up to standards when they joined the org, because of that, I'll have to disagree with Nut.


Question 2: A lot of our members are inactive and old. If they were kicked they wouldn't join again simply because they don't make replays, or hardly even play anymore.
Kicking them would demand our org to be a lot more dynamic, constantly judging our members in regards to the changing standards. Most people don't have the time/will to be constantly judged, and with Toribash still being a niche game, we would have very few members.


ManlyPotato: Active recruiters get their standards adjusted by being aware of the judgement their peers do. If you keep track of the applications and the Replays board you should know where to set the bar.


Dscigs: I disagree with your suggestion of taking into account the players join date. It could lead to the case where a new player would get in even though he was worse than someone older who applied at the same time with better replays. You're either good enough at the time you apply, or you aren't.
In my opinion, that's the only way we can keep this as objective as possible.