so many people on this site still name matt as "the greatest or most significant or most influential" epic mafia player ever only tells you how far mafia still is from becoming a serious game.
Chess writers have long recognized that the greatest chess players of all times are Bobby Fischer and Mikhail Tal, who were not the most famous or richest or the most dominant champions of their times, let alone of all times. Poker players rank the highly controversial Phil Hellmuth over richer players who were highly popular in cable network poker broadcasts across the US.
Mafia players are still blinded by 'competitive' success. soda won more than anyone else (not true, by the way), therefore they must have been the greatest. Chess enthusiants grow up reading the games of the great players of the past, poker players grow up watching great Hellmuth blow-up videos of the past. Mafia players are often totally ignorant of the mafia games of the past, they barely know the original pioneers.
No wonder they will think that matt did anything worthy of being saved.
When you find out the best you are not supposed to cite historical players who once did something when the site meta was different and not this evolved. I doubt currently there is anyone who can claim to be better than matt. You may have a better win rate or might beat him in a game. He might fuk up galactically in a game. But he has done all the things that the rest of the players have not (besides a few selected players)
People like harkinian who get jealous on others being called best remain a failure at everything in life. If you don't like someone being called the best then prove it by doing something instead of whining about it. It bothers you because you are a terrible person.