I have only been applying the last 2 or 3 years in other states, so I fit your strawman. If I didn't like their systems, I wouldn't apply. I am all for restructuring point systems, heck I can't even get a tag to hunt my own property in eastern Colorado every year, but denigrating current point holders isn't goin to build a consensus.
I have problems with a lot of state draw systems but still participate because that’s the only way I’m going to go hunting. You can advocate for change but still play by the rules. Disliking the rules does not mean that you can’t play the game.
Pointing out the flaws of point systems, or the lines of thinking that put them in place, isn’t denigrating current point holders. I’m a point holder in six states(albeit not very many points). There are people in this very thread, that seem to think that because they have applied for 26+ years for a species in a state that they are entitled to hunt that species in that state. When NM has 38 years worth of elk applicants, and the units they are known for have 100-250 years worth of applicants, there is NOT ONE POINT HOLDER who has EARNED a top tier tag, OR STOOD IN LINE LONG ENOUGH. Pointing out that fact should not be considered “denigrating”. The FACT is that there aren’t enough tags to go around, especially for the top tier hunts. There isn’t a point system in the country that has finished maxing out “point creep”, and guys burning 26 points to go on them have not waited their fair share. Not one point system ever started where all applicants were 12 years old. The reason guys today can be in the max pool at 26 points in a system that is 26-35 years old is because A LOT of the applicants IN THE FIRST YEAR OF THE SYSTEM were ALREADY OLD. They died. Without change(which is inevitable) there will come a day when all max point holders entered a system at the age of 12(or whatever depending on the state), none are young, and they haven’t gone hunting in that state for that species. Is that the system that we want?
There are at least two states I would not even apply in right now if it wasn’t for points because I cannot currently hunt them. I apply in them however because I want to hunt them someday, and if I do not get in line now, I will never be able to hunt them. Is it fair that I can get in line today to hunt in a state that I do not intend to hunt any time soon? Perhaps I will hunt there in 2030, or 2040, or 2050. When I decide to go, why should I be at the front of the line ahead of someone who is going into the draw for the very first time in their life? Was it their choice to turn 12 in 2040? Were they less dedicated? Do they own public land less than I do? Does the state manage wildlife in my trust or in “public trust”? Is a new hunter not a part of the public? Is the demand that we see in all of the states real? Point systems create false demand. If all states were random, I would apply for 1/3 of what I appear to want to go hunt. Will I be upset if they turn the system on its head and make my points meaningless? I’ll be disappointed for sure. If they just make the scheme worse, I’ll be upset for sure. If they make it random, or closer to random, I’ll be glad they did it, but the longer it takes, the sadder I’ll be that I’m on the wrong end of the stick both coming and going.
If it’s “denigrating” for me to say that I won’t feel sorry for a person if changes to a point system prevent them from drawing a tag that never had enough tags to meet demand in the first place, then I guess I’m denigrating them. The fact is, anyone applying anywhere needs to come to the realization that no point system, matter how perfect or elaborate can get someone a tag when demand exceeds supply.