The importance of job points

[Seillan]

Thanks for taking the time to consider my suggestions.

Honestly even if just the two you liked were implemented it would make CP a lot more reasonable.


We can't "figure it out" because it's ludicrous. My boots were $100 off. That doesn't mean I got them for free. That's just so many facepalm I can't even count them.

Honestly, its fine to disagree with others. If you really really like how grindy CP is, that's fine. You have a right to that opinion. I don't understand it, because there are enough CP in enough categories that you could grind them for years even if they vastly increased the rate of gain, but again, that's an opinion and a preference and you have a right to it.

But you don't have a right to redefine reality.

I agree. I might be more on the side of preferring long-term progression (as my earlier post pointed out), but the argument that getting something for less = getting something for free is just straight up nonsense. My troll senses are tingling.

[dasva]

it's not a strawman, but yours is. any # will do, doesn't matter the amount. I will bring it back to JP though for you that can't figure out the similarities of asking something as reducing price is same as getting something for free:

say you are getting 100 CP a kill. It would take 300 kills to get a JP.
SE then makes it so you get 300 CP a kill.
In 300 kills you are getting 3 JP. That's 2 JP for free for the work of only doing 1.

I don't think you know what the words you are using mean. So yes I can't figure it out because it's simply not what those words mean. You purposefully exaggerated something in a way no one was suggesting to make it look like your point worked. But if you did a reasonable amount no one would agree with you. No one says about how their Safeway club card gives them stuff for free.

A discount isn't getting something free it's getting something cheaper. There is a reason why our language has these separate words and terms and it isn't redundancy and there is a difference. If they truly meant the same thing then there would be absolutely no stigma towards asking for free stuff nor would it even be considered a derogative as it is now and as it is being used in this thread.

[dasva]

what's facepalm is that you don't realize that you got $100 for free.

What's more facepalm is you still don't know what the definition of free is. But here is Merriam try to see which one fits your definition



1

a : having the legal and political rights of a citizen

b : enjoying civil and political liberty <free citizens>

c : enjoying political independence or freedom from outside domination

d : enjoying personal freedom : not subject to the control or domination of another

2

a : not determined by anything beyond its own nature or being : choosing or capable of choosing for itself

b : determined by the choice of the actor or performer <free actions>

c : made, done, or given voluntarily or spontaneously

3

a : relieved from or lacking something and especially something unpleasant or burdensome <free from pain> <a speech free of political rhetoric> —often used in combination <error-free>

b : not bound, confined, or detained by force

4

a : having no trade restrictions

b : not subject to government regulation

c of foreign exchange : not subject to restriction or official control

5

a : having no obligations (as to work) or commitments <I'll be free this evening>

b : not taken up with commitments or obligations <a free evening>

6

: having a scope not restricted by qualification <a free variable>


7

a : not obstructed, restricted, or impeded <free to leave>

b : not being used or occupied <waved with his free hand>

c : not hampered or restricted in its normal operation

8

a : not fastened <the free end of the rope>

b : not confined to a particular position or place <in twelve-tone music, no note is wholly free for it must hold its place in the series — J. L. Stewart>

c : capable of moving or turning in any direction <a free particle>

d : performed without apparatus <free tumbling>

e : done with artificial aids (as pitons) used only for protection against falling and not for support <a free climb>

9

a : not parsimonious <free spending>

b : outspoken

c : availing oneself of something without stint

d : frank, open

e : overly familiar or forward in action or attitude

f : licentious

10

: not costing or charging anything


11

a (1) : not united with, attached to, combined with, or mixed with something else : separate <free ores> <a free surface of a bodily part> (2) : freestanding <a free column>

b : chemically uncombined <free oxygen> <free acids>

c : not permanently attached but able to move about <a free electron in a metal>

d : capable of being used alone as a meaningful linguistic form <the word hats is a free form> — compare 5bound 7

12

a : not literal or exact <free translation>

b : not restricted by or conforming to conventional forms <free skating>

13

: favorable —used of a wind blowing from a direction more than six points from dead ahead


14

: not allowing slavery


15

: open to all comers

[Olor]

I agree. I might be more on the side of preferring long-term progression (as my earlier post pointed out), but the argument that getting something for less = getting something for free is just straight up nonsense. My troll senses are tingling.

See, I respect this. Just like I respect the fellow who disagreed with me about getting CP while synced down on a 99 job. That's cool. We have different views of things, but we recognize the difference between an opinion and redefining words.

[Singforu]

I don't think you know what the words you are using mean. So yes I can't figure it out because it's simply not what those words mean. You purposefully exaggerated something in a way no one was suggesting to make it look like your point worked. But if you did a reasonable amount no one would agree with you. No one says about how their Safeway club card gives them stuff for free.

A discount isn't getting something free it's getting something cheaper. There is a reason why our language has these separate words and terms and it isn't redundancy and there is a difference. If they truly meant the same thing then there would be absolutely no stigma towards asking for free stuff nor would it even be considered a derogative as it is now and as it is being used in this thread.

no i didn't exaggerate to make it look like my point worked. i could have used 99%, 50%, 25%, or even 1%. try another strawman. and thank you for proving my point by mentioning "reasonable amount" and "Safeway club card". Amount doesn't matter, 99% free or 1% free, it's still partially free.

you saying you don't think i don't know what the words mean doesn't make it so. I use words as they are defined. I gave an example of how 2 JP were given with only the work for 1. That is free as in the definition of: "not needing to be paid for" because you only paid for 1 JP and not the other 2 JP.

A discount is getting something for free. I'll use Olor's example of $100 off on her boots. Say she has $300 in her pocket and goes to buy a pair of $300 boots. When she gets to the store to her surprise they offer to give it for $100 off. So she leaves the store with a $300 pair of boots and $100 still in her pocket. Net gain: $100.

[detlef]

Here's another analogy. Let's say you have two coupons. One is for a free cookie. The other is a buy one cookie, get one free. Can we see the difference now? Getting a cookie without paying anything versus getting an extra cookie if you pay full price?

Double CP campaign means if you put in the work for CP you get extra. It's not the same as just free CP without putting in the work.

[scaevola]

what's facepalm is that you don't realize that you got $100 for free.

that's

uh

gosh

i hope you never have to buy a used car, buddy

[FrankReynolds]

it was an example to prove a point, which clearly went over your head.

No, I got it. It was just wrong and you purposely used skewed numbers in an attempt to make it sound like people were asking for much more than they are.

[dasva]

no i didn't exaggerate to make it look like my point worked. i could have used 99%, 50%, 25%, or even 1%. try another strawman. and thank you for proving my point by mentioning "reasonable amount" and "Safeway club card". Amount doesn't matter, 99% free or 1% free, it's still partially free.

you saying you don't think i don't know what the words mean doesn't make it so. I use words as they are defined. I gave an example of how 2 JP were given with only the work for 1. That is free as in the definition of: "not needing to be paid for" because you only paid for 1 JP and not the other 2 JP.

A discount is getting something for free. I'll use Olor's example of $100 off on her boots. Say she has $300 in her pocket and goes to buy a pair of $300 boots. When she gets to the store to her surprise they offer to give it for $100 off. So she leaves the store with a $300 pair of boots and $100 still in her pocket. Net gain: $100.

Yeah sorry calling BS. You don't go to the huge extreme of 99% off on a whim. If you really thought those other percentages would've helped your argument you would have used them. Is English not your first language? Because that isn't what strawman means either. Nor do my examples come close to proving your point. And there is no such thing as partially free

Clearly you don't. Because guess what you still worked for those JPs you just happened to get more out of them but you still had to work for them. The value of work (like most values) is subjective. Increasing the value placed on that work does in no one shape or form count as getting free stuff because you still have to work for it. If it was really without cost or payment you would have just gotten it and yet no you still have to go out farm... almost like there was still a cost just a lower one. By that logic a raise free money. Heck by that insane leap of logic inflation is actually free money for everyone! And if they raise the requirements it's stealing!

Net gain? She left that store with $200 less than when she entered. What she "gained" was a greater amount of value per amount of money she spent but she didn't gain a single dollar.

[Singforu]

Yeah sorry calling BS. You don't go to the huge extreme of 99% off on a whim. If you really thought those other percentages would've helped your argument you would have used them. Is English not your first language? Because that isn't what strawman means either. Nor do my examples come close to proving your point. And there is no such thing as partially free

Clearly you don't. Because guess what you still worked for those JPs you just happened to get more out of them but you still had to work for them. The value of work (like most values) is subjective. Increasing the value placed on that work does in no one shape or form count as getting free stuff because you still have to work for it. If it was really without cost or payment you would have just gotten it and yet no you still have to go out farm... almost like there was still a cost just a lower one. By that logic a raise free money. Heck by that insane leap of logic inflation is actually free money for everyone! And if they raise the requirements it's stealing!

Net gain? She left that store with $200 less than when she entered. What she "gained" was a greater amount of value per amount of money she spent but she didn't gain a single dollar.

You can call it BS all you want, it doesn't matter, because the % doesn't help nor hinder my point at all. The amount doesn't matter, don't know how many times i need to repeat that. And it's you that doesn't seem to have english as a first language. Attacking a Strawman is creating the illusion of having refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition by covertly replacing it with a different proposition and then to refute or defeat that false argument. That is what you did. The point being argued in generality of that reducing requirements equaled getting something for free. You said "You purposefully exaggerated something in a way no one was suggesting to make it look like your point worked" when other people's suggestions had nothing to do with the argument. It was whether or not reducing requirements equaled getting something for free in any situation. So yes, you did a strawman. Your statement implied mine was correct only because of the % I used. The amount doesn't matter. And yes there is such things as partially free. I will give an example: SE makes it so you don't have to do nyzul tokens to obtain a mythic. Part of your mythic (the nyzul tokens part) is now free. The whole thing isn't, just that part.

No you didn't work for those JP. you worked for the first one. You got the other two for free. The value of work for JP is already defined, it isn't subjective. Your saying that increasing the value on that work does in no one shape or form count as getting free stuff because you still have to work for it is ludicrous. You are doing less work for 3 JP than what is normally required. There is a base work/CP already established. If you double the CP gain rate, you are doing 1/2 the work to obtain the same amount. If you triple the CP gain rate, you are doing 1/3 the work to obtain the same amount.

She goes and sell that $300 dollar boots for $300. She now has $400. Items of value = dollars = items of value.


Well, I'd love to stay and argue with your silliness some more; however, you can reply all you want, but I won't see it. I am going on vacation (I'm sure you won't miss me) to Antarctica soon and so I need to pack and get ready to go.

Square Enix - please don't make any decisions based off what is said in this thread over the next 2.5 weeks, thanks!


=P