Question about FFLogs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moonlite

Not a pro or negative parse question. But does anyone find it weird you post something on here from in game and you have to blur out all the names. But SE turns a blind eye to people loading measurements of other players on another site and don't bat an eye.

---

People can be stupid. If someone posts another player's name in a negative light, you'd have people blacklist or attempt to grief the named players, regardless of whether any of the accusations were true. Another reason is everyone would see how easy it is to get away with several blatant ToS violations and SE doesn't want that. Also they have control over the forums and not some random website.

Has the owner of that site ever said why it isn't opt-in?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alaray

No that's not harassment, that's a player not meeting the bar set for that party. That's like saying: someone who is excluded from a party because they only want to play ARC at level 80 with level 1 gear equipped is being harassed.

Make/find a group better suited for the play level you're at.

Actual, real harassment can end up being serious. Turning it into a bad joke does no one any favors.

---

Nevermind the example of bad parse history; I don't want to get into a series of hypotheticals. However, what about using that string in your profile to hide logs? If the party leader tells you straight out, "you can't play with us because you hide your parses" and proceeds to kick you - is that not harassment? What do you call that?

Here's a hint: If the party leader actually did say anything relating to FFLogs or parsing being the reason you can't play with them, then you could report him or her and they would get a meeting with a GM.

Also, your example is a terrible misrepresentation. A Lv80 ARC with Lv1 gear equipped wouldn't be able to meet actual party-finder criteria to join the party; role slots can be set to require Jobs only and no Classes with the addition of a minimum iLevel. I don't see a "must have FFLogs visible" option though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vnolan

Has the owner of that site ever said why it isn't opt-in?

---

TL:DR, for it to truly be opt-in would require ACT to also become an opt-in program. (I.E: ACT would have to include a blacklist of player names not to parse in its function)

He mentioned so long as ACT parses everyone in the party, it'd be trivial for someone to create a second website that'd reveal the non-opted in names of people if he ever made FFlogs opt-in since ACT still stores that data on the parse file. He then explained It's even happened when a bunch of Chinese players created a Chinese version of FFlogs, and that exposed every hidden name on FFlogs anyway since ACT still keeps track of that info.

He also humorously noted how in the many years of running WoWlogs, he's never had the request to hide away data, it's only ever been a request from FF14 players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HakaseNyan

Nevermind the example of bad parse history; I don't want to get into a series of hypotheticals. However, what about using that string in your profile to hide logs? If the party leader tells you straight out, "you can't play with us because you hide your parses" and proceeds to kick you - is that not harassment? What do you call that?

---

I'd call it a fair reason to remove someone, so long as they aren't a jerk about it. This game's endgame content relies all around Hard enrages; mathematical equations that are extremely binary if you fail or not. When someone's out to complete Titan for example, I wouldn't fault that person for being hesitant for not wanting to party with someone that has their logs hidden. Bringing someone in who is obfuscated in their performance is a risk, you could get lucky or not. But between the choice of waiting for someone who has the performance AND shows it off vs someone who may or may not have the performance, potentially wasting lots of time if their performance isn't up to snuff, its easy to see why people would choose the former.

I see it as no different than not wanting to play with someone who claims "they've seen enrage, just need a good group." or "This is an alt." In all scenarios you're taking a gamble, and not wanting to take it due to lack of information available to you is not harassment. (Unless they straight up insult you/claim your performance must suck because you're hiding your numbers, etc, then that's harassment.) That being said, if anyone ever mentions parses in-game, they're asking for a report when they could simply say "sorry X, we got a friend coming" as a fib reason to remove a person.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MariaArvana

I'd call it a fair reason to remove someone, so long as they aren't a jerk about it. This game's endgame content relies all around Hard enrages; mathematical equations that are extremely binary if you fail or not. When someone's out to complete Titan for example, I wouldn't fault that person for being hesitant for not wanting to party with someone that has their logs hidden. Bringing someone in who is obfuscated in their performance is a risk, you could get lucky or not. But between the choice of waiting for someone who has the performance AND shows it off vs someone who may or may not have the performance, potentially wasting lots of time if their performance isn't up to snuff, its easy to see why people would choose the former.

I see it as no different than not wanting to play with someone who claims "they've seen enrage, just need a good group." or "This is an alt." In all scenarios you're taking a gamble, and not wanting to take it due to lack of information available to you is not harassment. (Unless they straight up insult you/claim your performance must suck because you're hiding your numbers, etc, then that's harassment.) That being said, if anyone ever mentions parses in-game, they're asking for a report when they could simply say "sorry X, we got a friend coming" as a fib reason to remove a person.

---

Look, I agree with the reasoning. The party lead has the final say no matter what. However, it's a unique situation where the party lead has 3rd party knowledge to use against the person wishing to join. If the leader brings up this knowledge, he or she gets in trouble for mentioning it and kicking the person. If the leader doesn't bring up this knowledge, he or she gets away with kicking the person. In one situation the person wishing to join can report the leader; the other he or she can't. If the person joining can't prove the reasoning behind their exclusion - are they even being harassed?

Anyway, ACT and FFLogs seem like such handy tools, and I feel I must reiterate that I do not use them or run the content that they are used for. I have a friend that was actually harassed over parsing shenanigans, and I have read plenty of statements from others about it too. Though, I do like to wonder what things would be like without these tools; Having to waste time failing duties with people you don't know a thing about sure sounds awful.

Are "harassment" and "inconvenience" interchangeable words now? "Omg I wasn't allowed to join a party ingame! Harsassment!" The heck?
Make your own party/static where you can make your own rules instead of trying to find ways of forcing yourself into someone else's party who doesn't want you there, or even worse, ruining the game for them out ofs pite by reporting because you are unable to cope with being told "no".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoyalBeef

Are "harassment" and "inconvenience" interchangeable words now? "Omg I wasn't allowed to join a party ingame! Harsassment!" The heck?

---

"Harassment" is just a buzzword around here that has lost it's original meaning long ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moonlite

But does anyone find it weird you post something on here from in game and you have to blur out all the names. But SE turns a blind eye to people loading measurements of other players on another site and don't bat an eye.

---

I see no need to obfuscate FF-Logs character data. Contrary to putting people in a certain light by posting chat screen shots etc (often telling an incomplete and one sides story), FF-Logs data is neutral and objective. Peoples interpretation of said data might not be, mind you, but the data itself is. That's why SE requires you to censor names in chat screenshots but doesn't care about FF-Logs.

Neither should any player btw. Play like the first human, you get the logs to show for it. Instead of raging on about "privacy" and "harassment" said player should just put in a tiny modicum of effort. Then the logs would be okay and there would be no fear of being viewed in a negative way.
People blow it out of the water anyway. I have some HORRIBLE parses up there. Wipe runs of evenings I was super tired after work, chaotic random groups, me being more busy with chatting in TS than paying attention to the boss, me herp-a-derping it as SMN w/o much of a clue about what I amdoing, you name it. Not once did s/o confront me about it. Oo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoyalBeef

Are "harassment" and "inconvenience" interchangeable words now? "Omg I wasn't allowed to join a party ingame! Harsassment!" The heck?
Make your own party/static where you can make your own rules instead of trying to find ways of forcing yourself into someone else's party who doesn't want you there, or even worse, ruining the game for them out ofs pite by reporting because you are unable to cope with being told "no".

---

For some, words are like magic spells. They will try different ones until the desired results are met. That's why people will kick others without saying a word.

I remember a player not long ago posting that kick without telling the reason should also be bannable too and how tiresome being kicked so often was. I can bet you that this person never though the fault was on him/her.

My point is: people will look for any excuse to enforce "you will carry my no matter what" mentality. After all, people checking logs beforehand for anything that it's not the current hardest content are super rare.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HakaseNyan

Nevermind the example of bad parse history; I don't want to get into a series of hypotheticals. However, what about using that string in your profile to hide logs? If the party leader tells you straight out, "you can't play with us because you hide your parses" and proceeds to kick you - is that not harassment? What do you call that?

Here's a hint: If the party leader actually did say anything relating to FFLogs or parsing being the reason you can't play with them, then you could report him or her and they would get a meeting with a GM.

Also, your example is a terrible misrepresentation. A Lv80 ARC with Lv1 gear equipped wouldn't be able to meet actual party-finder criteria to join the party; role slots can be set to require Jobs only and no Classes with the addition of a minimum iLevel. I don't see a "must have FFLogs visible" option though.

---

You're not playing at their expected level, or they can't gauge whether you're someone who can play at their desired level. Again, that's not harassment. That's: We don't want to potentially carry you. It's not a group that lines up with you. Find a different group.

There's plenty of other groups to join, or you can make your own. You're not being actively excluded from participating in the content as a whole, and have other options, and they aren't sending you tells telling you in detail why they think you suck. Or mocking you in tells and so on.

If someone entered my party and I didn't like them for some reason, I'm free to kick them. Whether they came in and perform so poorly on a fight they're barely a combatant, or started to throw around transphobic stuff, or whatever. There's not spot in the PF options to say "If you are replaceable with a NPC don't join" or "Don't fling around dumb comments" alongside the general description of what the group intends to do -- at least in cases of Savage since that's where people slap in the strat they're using. But I still hold the ability to kick those players from my party, be it for their own mouths, or for, as your posted examples falls under: Gameplay differences.

Sure, they can't tell you precisely why as a different rule covers mentioning ACT. But if you can infer why, why on earth do you want to play with them? And instead of hyperfixating on this 1 group who doesn't want you, why not find a different group from the multitudes that likely exist?

I am fairly convinced you don't know what harassment is. (ie: continual, aggressive, pressure aimed specifically at you -- like, if they started to send you a ton of /tells about why they hate you or the like, or if the sent /tells mocking you repeatedly, etc... -- but even a single case of that is reportable).

That entitlement that others should not be allowed topick who they want to group with is baffling xD That's like wanting to hang out and have fun with your friends, then your little sister whine's to your mom until she forces you to take her along, ruining everyone's day.

Baldesion Arsenal was the perfect example of how the entitled casuals in this game will attack anything that stands in their way of a carry. By that time a recurrent complaint, spiced with fake toxic stories mind you, about discord started to pop up.

To me, the peak entitlement was certain players asking for "toxic" healers to be banned because they refuse to rez them.

Edit: in Baldesion Arsenal you can't use the regular rez. In order to rez someone, the healer has to sacrifice itself. Paired with another spell there was a chance for the healer to come back to life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Driavna

To me, the peak entitlement was certain players asking for "toxic" healers to be banned because they refuse to rez them.

---

Wow, I dont even know what to say to that lol

Don't know why people arguing "should/ shouldn't pick your party member"...
Obiviously you can, I just not liking the way that FFlogs get/show those "infomation for picking".
(SE says it's legal then it is, but it's something I wouldn't do.)

I believe if FFlogs doing better, paying a little more respect to those who don't like "number competitions", such like not showing the name or hiding logs by default, there won't be so much conflict opinion in this topic.(Or maybe I won't even start this topic...)
And those who need information can still get what they want: just ask the one joining party to show their own logs, if they say no then you say no, simple and easy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zekrin

And those who need information can still get what they want: just ask the one joining party to show their own logs, if they say no then you say no, simple and easy.

---

If you ask a random player in-game for logs and that player reports you... well... congratulations! You are banned.

FFlogs already has the option to hide your own numbers if you desire. Why does it need to be the other way around?

With current rules, no one can mock a player for their performance without eating a ban.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zekrin

I believe if FFlogs doing better, paying a little more respect to those who don't like "number competitions", such like not showing the name or hiding logs by default, there won't be so much conflict opinion in this topic.(Or maybe I won't even start this topic...)

---

Basically this. No respected tools for whatever reasons is going to be "legal" if they don't show respect to the players involved. Doesn't matter if it's fflogs or twitch or whatever, remember that case where someone got flogged during their stream for "not conforming to damage standards" ? Hiding on request is at best has same respect of fixing your malware-infected laptop in a public wifi hotspot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Driavna

no one can mock a player for their performance without eating a ban.

---

So...If I didn't get it wrong, BAN means SE doesn't encourage FFlogs, then what you saying means "the site and how player using it is not allowed by SE, but I insist it should exist in a stealthy way"?
(Sounds like "Don't fight in public or you got caught. Fight when no one see you and your victim.":rolleyes: )

I thought SE allowed these action and using of logs according to the previous replies... Now I totally don't understand why judge other players with "things can't asking others to show" is ok.
Seem like SE DON'T want a player have other players logs(or judge them by logs), otherwise why they ban someone asked and got reported?
You make me confuse again, thanks bro :confused:


Oh, Almost forgot :"FFlogs already has the option" indeed, but not by default, which means who don't know the site can't do anything about it.
Their opinion had been ignored but still affected by the site :they could been kicked or rufused cause they didn't upload logs with better performance, whether they do have or don't. And like you said asking logs probably get banned, they won't be told why they got kicked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by uvuvwevwevweonyetenyevweugwemu

Basically this. No respected tools for whatever reasons is going to be "legal" if they don't show respect to the players involved. Doesn't matter if it's fflogs or twitch or whatever, remember that case where someone got flogged during their stream for "not conforming to damage standards" ? Hiding on request is at best has same respect of fixing your malware-infected laptop in a public wifi hotspot.

---

This is one of the dumbest false equivalencies I’ve ever seen on these forums. In no way is opting-out on fflogs the same as the situation you describe.

The creator of fflogs does indeed respect the community and has explained time and again why it’s opt-out and not opt-in. He’s even given two ways to opt-out so that players can decide if they’d rather create a fflogs account or not. Like my initial comment said, it’s literally as easy as adding a tag to your Lodestone profile. Takes less than 30 seconds.

Other comments have already explained situations that have “exposed” hidden data that was out of fflog’s control. The community itself is to blame for any negative use of the data. Which, by the way, you literally do not own. Because you don’t own the data, you don’t have any say in what’s done with it. Legally the only entity with any say is SE and we all already know they’re not going to go after fflogs anytime soon.

Finally, because you don’t own the data that constitutes and originates from you account, you have no expectation of privacy over said data.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZoLMiTRiPTaN

-

---

You misread my post. The site is neither legal or illegal because SE can't touch them. I don't really care what backwards privacy law fflogs server is in, it's not related to the more important question. "Why wait for damage/negativity to be done to a player and not filter out what it needs before saving or even displaying?". That's something they can DEFINITELY do, having some sense of responsibility. You can try fix it with nobody around or you can do more damage to the other 23 people before fixing it, either way fflogs is a very public space and has that responsibility.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZoLMiTRiPTaN

The creator of fflogs does indeed respect the community and has explained time and again why it’s opt-out and not opt-in. He’s even given two ways to opt-out so that players can decide if they’d rather create a fflogs account or not. Like my initial comment said, it’s literally as easy as adding a tag to your Lodestone profile. Takes less than 30 seconds.

---

Except that opting-out makes you suspicious, someone who has something to hide and is probably underperforming. Which makes it not really a choice when it is something not to do.

If he was really so nice the system would be opt-in. But in the end he just want more datas to get more traffic on his site, like every webmaster. And probably to get more people see the "donation" button on the bottom. Which is kind of akward if you ask me, to ask for money when all the datas you are using come from a forbidden add-on.

Quote:

---

Are "harassment" and "inconvenience" interchangeable words now?

---

Yes. We live in absurdville.

Quote:

---

If he was really so nice the system would be opt-in.

---

If it gets made opt-in, someone smart makes a website that day using act parse dumps and says "you dont get to opt out", and FFLogs dies.

That theres an opt-out feature already is almost nonsense.

If you're not good, work at getting better or expect people to only take you as a last resort.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zekrin

So...If I didn't get it wrong, BAN means SE doesn't encourage FFlogs, then what you saying means "the site and how player using it is not allowed by SE, but I insist it should exist in a stealthy way"?
(Sounds like "Don't fight in public or you got caught. Fight when no one see you and your victim.":rolleyes: )

---

Correct. ToS enforcement is quite literally a joke (bot, cheat, sell for money, but don't you dare use a bad word or mention those evil numbers) in this game. To put it simply, if something is against the ToS (parsing is), is reported and SE has proof that meets their standards (chat logs), they will issue account action.

If SE could disable parsers without losing subscribers (impossible) they would do it.

You shouldn't worry too much about it, people won't really judge you based on your logs unless you stomp around saying "I'm the best ___ in the world" or something along the lines of that, or you're looking for a static, which you can just ask for a trial run for those if your logs are bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pepsi_Plunge

I think the system would be better if they remove the names of players who didn't actively signed up on the page. Then you could still analyses your data, but you and others could only read the names of the fflog-members and everyone else would just be render anonymous.

Of course, you can log in and block it but it actually should be the other way around. If you are - for example - a Dragoon and didn't signed up, then in all the parses you participated in should just be a "Random Dragoon" or something like that and nobody should find anything by looking up your name. Personally while I'm actually very found of FFlogs and the data it provides for those who are wanting to improve, I just find it a bit irritating that everyone can look up the data of someone who might not even know that parses of them or the page itself even exists. I was quit surprised myself too when I first heard about that page and saw the logs.

---

I don't see any reason why parses should be anonymous by default. None at all. People have the right to know who they're letting into their parties. Nobody should be forced to carry a grey party member.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Katie_Kitty

I don't see any reason why parses should be anonymous by default. None at all. People have the right to know who they're letting into their parties. Nobody should be forced to carry a grey party member.

---

Nobody should be forced to cater to insane standards either, yet here we are

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NekoNova

Nobody should be forced to cater to insane standards either, yet here we are

---

I don't really think it's too much to ask that your party members be competent, particularly in Savage where carrying bad players can be excruciating. Especially since if people find themselves not being able to meet said 'insane standards' they can just make their own groups and usually get by rather swimmingly that way. I'm new to Savage with this tier now that my health and life have finally gotten under control and my DPS parse is /terrible/ as SCH. My healing makes up for it from what I can tell but I absolutely would not blame any group for wanting to try and nab someone who could put out better numbers. Especially as healing can become very scripted from what I've noticed once you get used to a specific fight. I'm the one having trouble adjusting to Savage. No one owes me a spot in a group and I'm rather grateful that my static is willing to put up with me as I adjust to the higher skill level. It's really not asking to much that I improve.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Katie_Kitty

I don't see any reason why parses should be anonymous by default. None at all. People have the right to know who they're letting into their parties. Nobody should be forced to carry a grey party member.

---

just don’t let the one who have no parse record to join your party.
some people just upload everything, normal raid, alliance raid...etc
those players who have no intention joining savage should not have to "do something" for their number not to be shown, especially we have a mentally of "hiding your log make you look fishy" among the community

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Enla

I don't really think it's too much to ask that your party members be competent, particularly in Savage where carrying bad players can be excruciating. Especially since if people find themselves not being able to meet said 'insane standards' they can just make their own groups and usually get by rather swimmingly that way. I'm new to Savage with this tier now that my health and life have finally gotten under control and my DPS parse is /terrible/ as SCH. My healing makes up for it from what I can tell but I absolutely would not blame any group for wanting to try and nab someone who could put out better numbers. Especially as healing can become very scripted from what I've noticed once you get used to a specific fight. I'm the one having trouble adjusting to Savage. No one owes me a spot in a group and I'm rather grateful that my static is willing to put up with me as I adjust to the higher skill level. It's really not asking to much that I improve.

---

It's not too much to ask for party members to be competent, especially in savage raids. Please don't misunderstand my comment as such.
A minimum performance is required from everyone involved to even have a chance at beating the encounter.
I understand that it's frustrating to perform well and only see the run fail because of someone.


What I do have a problem with is that people utilize the same tools and requirements for pretty much everything else.
And that's the main reason why these tools should not be standard/public to begin with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NekoNova

What I do have a problem with is that people utilize the same tools and requirements for pretty much everything else.
And that's the main reason why these tools should not be standard/public to begin with.

---

From my own experience, this is just not true. In a general basis, no one cares about anyone's numbers for most of the content. With savage being the exception and not even all turns. In fact, the meme about farm parties being traps parties happens because no one really bothers to check FFLogs.

The best of that people so much entitled on logs, is when they kicked me as healer in farm party because "my dps suck", and then hear from my friend dps kept there, that they constantly failed the duty thereafter because low healing and disbanded. But the new healer was surely better than me on dps. L M A O.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Driavna

From my own experience, this is just not true. In a general basis, no one cares about anyone's numbers for most of the content. With savage being the exception and not even all turns. In fact, the meme about farm parties being traps parties happens because no one really bothers to check FFLogs.

---

This. Even savage pugs don’t check and will only complain to someone / reform because of dps if it’s an issue in the group (can’t clear enrage with a «*fair*» amount of deaths because someone isn’t pulling their weight)

It’s only really statics that check logs and if you decide not to show yours then it’s highly likely it’s because they’re bad so it’s fair for them to opt out of even trying you. If you don’t have any then it’ll depend on the skill tier of your static. Some are willing to give newcomers a change and trial them.

Yes, it is very much against the umbrella ruled that exists to prevent third party tools and harassment. However, don't talk about it outside of private chats with people you trust and you shall be fine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LalaRu

The best of that people so much entitled on logs, is when they kicked me as healer in farm party because "my dps suck", and then hear from my friend dps kept there, that they constantly failed the duty thereafter because low healing and disbanded. But the new healer was surely better than me on dps. L M A O.

---

Seems like a foolproof strategy, if you let everyone die you don't have to heal them, which means more dps uptime Taps head

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zekrin

So...If I didn't get it wrong, BAN means SE doesn't encourage FFlogs, then what you saying means "the site and how player using it is not allowed by SE, but I insist it should exist in a stealthy way"?
(Sounds like "Don't fight in public or you got caught. Fight when no one see you and your victim.":rolleyes: )

I thought SE allowed these action and using of logs according to the previous replies... Now I totally don't understand why judge other players with "things can't asking others to show" is ok.
Seem like SE DON'T want a player have other players logs(or judge them by logs), otherwise why they ban someone asked and got reported?
You make me confuse again, thanks bro :confused:


Oh, Almost forgot :"FFlogs already has the option" indeed, but not by default, which means who don't know the site can't do anything about it.
Their opinion had been ignored but still affected by the site :they could been kicked or rufused cause they didn't upload logs with better performance, whether they do have or don't. And like you said asking logs probably get banned, they won't be told why they got kicked.

---

ACT, which is needed to upload to FFLogs, is technically against the rules, but SE has said they basically look the other way as long as you aren't using it to harass people. This let's SE have their cake and eat it too, as they can let more serious players have their performance metrics and prevent in-game harassment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NekoNova

What I do have a problem with is that people utilize the same tools and requirements for pretty much everything else.
And that's the main reason why these tools should not be standard/public to begin with.

---

They don't.
As soon as you mention anything that points towards you using a parser, you risk getting banned. Even if it's just a friendly comment commending someone's dps, you may have someone in your group that is completely against parsers and will jump at the chance to report a parsing player. And if you use it to point out poor performance, you're almost certainly in for a ban so nobody would dare to risk a ban for "enforcing" better gameplay in a dungeon.
So people keep silent. Many use it in DF content simply out of curiosity (mostly to see how well they are doing) but all they do is silently roll their eyes if someone is really bad. If they even care about it.
AST may use it to better discern who is worthy of their cards, tanks may use it to better discern how big they should pull. But they just make those decisions without saying anything about it.

So outside PF, where the leader sets the rules and you can always chose to not join if you don't like them, even if people use parsers it's of no consequence for everyone else.

Lets be real. FFLogs was always great especially for newer players. They generally pair this with FF Analysis and Analysis will help tell the player the faults they had. The real issue is that people using parsers tend to harass people and they didn't want that. Yoshi stated in live letters back then that parsers were still illegal programs to the game but noted it as a grey zone and would look the other way if not used to harass other players.

This is the same back in HW for them implementing a lot of other things to reduce toxicity in the community like removing chat in the 4 v 4 PvP which people barely played til Feast and it was actually not even that toxic. The toxicity mostly came around with raiders and Mentors in the Novice Network. More modernly though it seems the toxicity has died down quite a bit. Well asides these healers that assume they're above you and tend to make a lot of toxicity in parties. I've done my share of kicking these toxic pests from the party over the person who made a mistake. LoL. Who wants angry healer noises. Just kick and get rid of that pest. LoL.

...Maybe the fuel was a horrible person who ran in the US at the time and everyone seemed to get aggressively toxic in general. LoL. Either way it was a huge thing for SE to promote friendly gameplay and support to new players at the time.