You really have to give ACE a chance to address this through rule set though. This is the first time that guild politics have taken control of a campaign. I would caution against calling them bad players. They are certainly opportunistic, but that can't be used against them.
Do I believe alphas are a good time to spout about elitism and shut out dissenting opinions? Absolutely not. That is pretty counter productive for an alpha.
I would argue that the post was not meant for community feedback at all. It was a statement acknowledging that an uncle bob scenerio had been realized. (Edits since alliance carry over as an argument for uncle bob scenerio is tenuous. Maybe it is just that uncle Bob and aunt Maurie decided not to attack each other?). In his post he said that it is game design that caused, or at least precipitated a stacked campaign. I believe ACE will move carrots around for a time, but I imagine their best mileage will come from taking carrots away or reducing the disparity between losing and winning.
One important part, that people active on the forums should think about is that pann locked that thread conceding that they didn't want to pass out warnings since it would lead to account bans. Seriously? It is just a game, in alpha, Be nice. (I am not pointing any fingers T_T;)
I am thankful that at the very least, lead developers see a problem and they would like to address it as well as possible.
Yeah, your right on the money here. I don't know the best way to mediate it, even though I can throw out some half baked 30 second idea, I definitely don't think this has a simple fix. I think that by design ACE intended for the really hardcore players to be drawn to the DREGs (or w/e the GvG campaigns are). Therefore, they would incentivise the NBA players to not play with the more casual player base.