Some points
To me it seems more arbitrary to allow some unofficial emulators and not others, than it does to ban emulators.
This makes sense. I am still against banning emulator though but I think the distinction should be between software/hardware instead of official/unofficial.
Emulator naturally does not always function as the official releases do, and it affects times.
Official or not, emulated games don't play the same as N64 anyway. I feel like this can't be used as an argument against (PC) emulators when the majority of 'wr' and close times on the leaderboards are played on VC for the sole reason that N64 times can't compete with there being less lag, faster loading zones, faster pausing, etc. in the VC releases
because of inaccurate emulation.
Having N64 and emulator on the same leaderboards actually encourages people to play emulator because it is easier to get a better time (not to mention easier to access). It also doesn't make a lot of sense when a even top player on the original hardware couldn't get close to the times people can get with an emulator.
If time was put in to making a standardized ZSR approved emulator, I'm not sure how I'd feel about it until i saw it, but it's a cool idea.
Also, VC/GC are not unofficial emulators, they are Nintendo releases. Banning them would be super dumb (and would never happen)
I agree that having a standard emulator that people can use is a good idea but I can't see it ever being enforceable. People will play what they want. Again, I don't agree with banning emulators. I do think that people should stop having the double standard of "VC is good because it's official but PJ64 sucks" because both are pretty inaccurate (PJ64 is actually more accurate sometimes lol). If emulators are going to be banned it should be all or nothing, anything in between is adding unnecessary arbitrary rules that we shouldn't need.
Sorry if I sound like I'm attacking you or anything. I'm not, I'm just showing another point of view and I find this discussion interesting.