Here's my stance:

I somewhat agree with R3ptile, but I don't like the way he presented his argument. Chippie mentioned that it isn't fair for newer players to lose in the first round, but wouldn't that mean the more skilled players don't deserve to win and move on in the tournament? As already mentioned, tournaments are meant to find out who is the best, and therefore should focus on the better players. That's the basic reason why most tournaments use seeding whenever possible.

R3ptile mentioned that the JJ2WC dueling tournament being based on skill was "how it's Always been," but that tournament hasn't been around for that long. A better basis for such an argument is the playoff system used in certain sports. Playoffs are used for the same reasons I mentioned above.

The one thing that wasn't mentioned in its entirety is how seeding would be done. If this was to be done, it would probably be in everyone's best interest to seed everyone. Unfortunately, there isn't any completely fair method from which to derive such seeds. JDC has varying activity from season to season (with scores highly correlated to activity) and the JJ2WC tournaments do not account for everyone. Even if the seeding could somehow be done fairly, some people would still complain. So proper seeding could possibly be a waste of time.

And since this is a double elimination tournament, it doesn't matter quite as much where all the players are positioned in the first round. Good players who get knocked out of the winner's bracket have a decent chance of winning the loser's bracket and possibly the entire tournament. I can't say random seeding is the best solution, but it's better than trying in vain to judge how good players are from limited sources.