SE's most difinitive statement yet on parsers

[ispano]

Just tell me where SE said it's okay to use a parser and we won't have a problem ever ever ever!

Changing the subject now, are we?

[Mcshiggs]

Changing the subject now, are we?

The point of this entire thread was SE saying it is not ok to use any third party tool, it is against ToS, if anyone changed the subject, it would be all those that are arguing that parsers are ok, and ignoring the fact that they are against the ToS.

[Elven]

Changing the subject now, are we?

Not changing the subject at the end of the day it doesn't matter what you say nor does it matter what I say all I really care about is the rules.

[ispano]

Not changing the subject at the end of the day it doesn't matter what you say nor does it matter what I say all I really care about is the rules.

You can care about the rules all you want, since this has nothing to do with them. Calling a parser a cheat, against the rules or not, is just simply wrong.

The point of this entire thread was SE saying it is not ok to use any third party tool, it is against ToS, if anyone changed the subject, it would be all those that are arguing that parsers are ok, and ignoring the fact that they are against the ToS.

And if you read the back and forth between me and Elven, you'd see it's about calling it a cheat, which it isn't. Not saying it's ok, not saying it isn't ok. Simply saying it's not a cheat, no matter how much one wants to believe it is.

[Mcshiggs]

And if you read the back and forth between me and Elven, you'd see it's about calling it a cheat, which it isn't. Not saying it's ok, not saying it isn't ok. Simply saying it's not a cheat, no matter how much one wants to believe it is.

Definition of cheat: to break a rule or law usually to gain an advantage at something
It is against ToS to use parsers, so that is breaking a rule if you use one, and the reason for using one is to gain an advantage, so by definition, it is cheating. The fact that it is against the rules is part of what makes it cheating, if it wasn't against ToS, it would still be used to gain an advantage, but since it would no longer be breaking a rule, it would no longer be cheating. It's like using a calculator on an algebra test, some teachers are ok with because they are just wanting to teach you the algebraic principles and you should already have a firm grasp on simple math, some teachers won't let you use that calculator because they think by not using one you are keeping you simple math skills honed. It is cheating to use the calculator in one class, where it isn't in the other, even though it would provide the same benefit to both.

[ispano]

Definition of cheat: to break a rule or law usually to gain an advantage at something
It is against ToS to use parsers, so that is breaking a rule if you use one, and the reason for using one is to gain an advantage, so by definition, it is cheating.

Still wrong.

The only reason a parser is currently against the ToS is because they can only be third party programs right now. Not by virtue that it's a parser, at least not until SE says otherwise. So, no, not cheating.

Because once we get addons and have player made meters/parsers via that API, third party external ones would still be disallowed, while the Addon version would not, even though they do the same thing.

[Mcshiggs]

Still wrong.

The only reason a parser is currently against the ToS is because they can only be third party programs right now. Not by virtue that it's a parser, at least not until SE says otherwise. So, no, not cheating.

Because once we get addons and have player made meters/parsers via that API, third party external ones would still be disallowed, while the Addon version would not, even though they do the same thing.

Addons unless made by SE are still third party tools, like I said, once they are no longer against ToS to use, using one won't be cheating, but as long as they are against ToS, by definition using one is cheating. I really don't see how you can't see this, the definition of the word cheat has been put before you, you agree that they are against ToS, you agree that using one provides an advantage over not using one. So you agree that it meets what it takes to be cheating, but still refuse to admit that it is cheating at this moment.

Who knows, later down the line SE could toss in a radar add-on or anything else, by your theory since there is a possibility that it could happen in the future, and the only way to use it now is with a third party app, then it isn't cheating to use one now, even though SE is actioning accounts that they prove to be using them now.

[ispano]

Addons unless made by SE are still third party tools, like I said, once they are no longer against ToS to use, using one won't be cheating, but as long as they are against ToS, by definition using one is cheating. I really don't see how you can't see this, the definition of the word cheat has been put before you, you agree that they are against ToS, you agree that using one provides an advantage over not using one. So you agree that it meets what it takes to be cheating, but still refuse to admit that it is cheating at this moment.

No, I agree that Third Party Programs are against the ToS. That's what you are refusing to acknowledge. If it was against the rules solely for being a parser, it might be a different story, might. But like I said, when addons get implemented, and we have functioning in game DPS meters/parsers, BUT third party programs are still dis-allowed, such as the many that exist now, what then? Because that would be a huge contradiction to your argument.

Who knows, later down the line SE could toss in a radar add-on or anything else, by your theory since there is a possibility that it could happen in the future, and the only way to use it now is with a third party app, then it isn't cheating to use one now, even though SE is actioning accounts that they prove to be using them now.

Missing the point entirely. The act of parsing is not cheating. Using a third party program is for sure against the ToS. The only reason Parsers are ONLY third party programs now, is because we don't have an addon system in place yet.

[LadyVal]

snip

cheat [cheet]
verb (used with object)
1. to defraud; swindle: He cheated her out of her inheritance.
2. to deceive; influence by fraud: He cheated us into believing him a hero.
3. to elude; deprive of something expected: He cheated the law by suicide.
verb (used without object)
4. to practice fraud or deceit: She cheats without regrets.
5. to violate rules or regulations: He cheats at cards.
6. to take an examination or test in a dishonest way, as by improper access to answers.

Really, technically it is a cheat. The rules say it is disallowed, you use it anyways, it's a cheat by definition of the word. Regardless of why said rule was implemented.

I personally don't care if people parse, since I'm not that heavily invested in endgame and raw numbers. I just wish SE would find a way to make parsing accessible and soon just to stop the massive fights on the subject. This thread is like the perfect example of chaotic/lawful alignments from DnD. lol

[Elven]

You can care about the rules all you want, since this has nothing to do with them. Calling a parser a cheat, against the rules or not, is just simply wrong.

If you're too ignorant to see that anything currently not allowed in the Tos that gives someone using them an advantage over someone that isn't. You might as well sanction teleport hacks and bots.