I think we need a unified vision of how bans etc. would work (practically but especially philosophically) before we can do our own metagame. Otherwise it's just going to be like Congress or something.
Going to voice opposition to the idea of altering base stats etc. HUGELY opening pandora's box and that's not even getting into issues or purity or whatever. "slippery slope is a logical fallacy" yeah okay but seriously there are so many things I would change if I could, how could we possibly make that focused let alone reach consensus on what should be altered.
(Emphasis on consensus because this is small enough that that really should be the ideal if we do it.)
So I think the bold part is important.
Also just throwing this out there: there are fundamental limits to a forum-specific metagame that involve interactions between each other. I remember playing BW vs. wolf enough that we knew each others' teams, playing style (not team style but execution), etc. and while this was fun I feel like we would have a hard time actually making sense of the "metagame." Basically I'm suggesting that the scale might be an issue.
EDIT: Also I think it's awesome that so many people are posting, that was the purpose of the thread in many respects!