When it comes to Classic, Blizzard's goal is to provide an authentic Vanilla experience, but they also needed to come up with technology to handle many players at launch, which is similar to sharding. While the use of this technology will be limited to the first month following launch, many players are questioning this decision and wouldn't like to see layering in the game at all.
World of Warcraft Classic is currently in beta, which means some players are getting a chance to experience a much older version of the MMO ahead of its release. WoW Classic is based on how WoW played in August 2006, back around update 1.12. Back then, things were different. Tauren hitboxes were much larger, sitting could cause certain combat effects to not trigger and completed quests were marked with dots and not question marks. Strange days.
As someone who's leveled enough Alliance and Horde characters to fill multiple accounts, it remains to be seen whether replaying content I've seen many times before will keep my attention in the long term. But even the thought that it might suggests that for many people, this could represent a novel experience compared to the modern game, something at least worth a try.
Although the Battle Pet Trainer will only offer to teach you your race-specific companion, it is possible to add all of these pets to your collection. You can either find them in your faction’s auction house or you can create a character of the race whose pet you would like to learn. Using your new character, you can seek out any battle pet trainer in major cities. After you learn the pet, you can delete the character; the pet you learned will not be removed from your collection.
If your pet's health gets too low or its attacks aren't very effective against a certain combatant, you can always switch out your current pet with another companion on your team. Only pets that are considered active (i.e., those in your three Battle Pet Slots), may be switched in and out during the battle. Once the match is over, you can always change up your active pet team, which is useful if one of your pets is low on health or dead.
All of this is keeping with the spirit of vanilla, which I think is more important than that a specific number be 11 instead of 12. And it would help to "resize the swing" by making the game harder to the more experienced community, and forcing people to re-discover the game rather than simply looking up whatever they want to know on a spreadsheet somewhere.
No he's just not paying attention. The wanted quests are built into both the leveling guides and the "Zandalar Forever" achievement guide. They aren't in the rep guide because they are not repeatable and by the time you hit max level they should be done. You'll also notice the rep guide doesn't contain every single possible completable quest that rewards rep. It is designed to focus on repeatable objectives, world quests, large quest lines, and missions.
Analogy: think back on riding the swings in kindergarten. Was it fun? Now, imagine going back to those swings exactly as they were, and sitting in them now, as an adult. They're too small. They don't fit. Your feet drag on the ground because they're so low to the ground. The bar over your head is low enough that you can reach out and touch it, and even at the highest the swing will go, it's only about chest high when you're standing up. It's exactly the same swing, but riding on it now is a very different experience, yes?
Other methods have been discussed. For example, mods could be crippled. DBM didn't exist back then, and the other boss that did that I don't remember the name of, didn't do as much back then as DBM does now. If our goal is to recreate the experience as it was, then obviously not having DBM would be a reasonable way to accomplish that. DBM simply existing, makes the game today easier than it was. So disallow it. Again, this is completely consistent with the spirit of vanilla. Remember one-button-decursing? That was nerfed. They crippled the capabilities of the modding API to disallow that because it made the game too easy. So what if they cripple it a little bit more to once again make the game less easy?
To me, certain character limits tend to be problematic not because of the length of actual content, but because of formatting tags and embedding taking up a lot of characters. This is something I experience on most of websites, not just this one, but the most aggravating issue over here is linking to user profiiles and other sources of strategies, which could be alleviated with internalisation of link paths and @mentions.