Removing stats from the equation, if roleplaying a smart/dumb character is difficult or unwieldy for you, then don't do it. We plan to base stats around the CS, and if you wrote "my character is SO SMART" and then can't play it... well, whose fault is that?
Except maybe sometimes people don't write characters with different traits--smart, dumb, strong, weak, charismatic, ugly--because they're saying "look at me my character is SO X!" and instead write characters that way because they've never tried writing that type before and want to do something different. Or maybe they acknowledge that, in general, stories need to have varied casts. Or maybe they believe good characters need a variety of traits that can be positive, negative, or neutral.
I don't personally care whether we use stats or not--they're meant to be a comparison to weed out Sue behaviors, a progress bar to incentivize character development, a guide to what role different characters might serve in a team, etc. All good and well. But if they're being used, what's wrong with discussing the pros and cons to using them, and the things that players might want to be aware of when writing under such constraints?
"Don't try to do things if you can't do them well from the start! If someone is in the process of learning but makes a mistake, well whose fault is that?"
