The Real Problem with Parsers

[Aiselia]

I could be wrong but I don't think he was being serious. Just went back and re-read it and I think he was totally doing it in jest.

No one's said anything because it was clearly a sarcastic response to my comment. Context, guys. It's important. >_>

To be honest, I'm kind of scared that people thought my story about being kicked over not eating a completely non-edible food instead a completely non-existing food was meant to be serious. :/

Even more so when I added the important detail later that it allegedly took place in Cutter's Cry. >.>

You lose a lot of credibility by lying like that.

Even if I was intending that to be taken seriously, do you honestly think I care about my credibility among people who literally have said they haven't read my arguments and then make things up because they assume it's what I'm saying, regardless of how many times I specifically state the opposite?

Do you really think I care about my credibility when I've specifically said I'm not anti-parser and then people jump at me for being anti-parser?

Do you truly, truly (outrageously) think that I care about my credibility when people try to convince me that parsers would be great for allowing people to track their numbers for improvement when I've already said repeatedly that I agree?

[ShinSenpai]

truly, truly (outrageously)

Okay there Taric.

[Aiselia]

Okay there Taric.

I won't lie, I'm at least a little disappointed when people consider that the reference.

[SpookyGhost]

I won't lie, I'm at least a little disappointed when people consider that the reference.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6G_o1MYECg ?

[Tsilyi]

I won't lie, I'm at least a little disappointed when people consider that the reference.

is it because everyone is a stickler for detail and you omitted precisely one "truly?"

i did not expect this thread to be 43 pages when i responded to this...

[Aiselia]

you seem to believe would become rampant.

I never said that.

You've been watching this thread for how long and you still think that?

Tip: There's a difference between "become rampant" and "increase".

And don't you dare even suggest that it wouldn't increase because EVERYONE in this thread knows that's a lie. The only question really is how much of an increase.

is it because everyone is a stickler for detail and you omitted precisely one "truly?"

This video has 2, actually. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSLhrIuAZak

then claim he can't be wrong because he never had a position.

Just because:
I've never said that.

In fact, I've stated my position a few times.

In fact, I quoted it a few times in a single post to someone who didn't read it before incorrectly trying to state my position.

Here, I'll help you because you obviously missed it despite the fact that you quoted something from that post (and then try to say I take things out of context...).

people like me who want a personal parser so people can improve but don't see how the subjective benefits of a party parser objectively outweigh what SE expects will happen?

that's not my claim. That's SE's fear. It's irrelevant if I make that claim because you still have to prove SE wrong. If I stayed out of this thread completely? Yeah, SE would still think the same thing.

I have zero problems with personal parsers to be allowed to see one's own output so they can improve if they care, and that that would be a safe middle ground for SE to implement because they can still maintain their current policy of not bringing up others' specific DPS because they shouldn't be able to see someone else's with a personal parser.

I'm completely fine with parsers as long as they don't create extra jerks and that I'm all for a personal parser for people to see their own DPS to improve because that's the safest middle ground for SE to let people get their numbers to see if they have room for improvement without risking extra jerks calling people out on their DPS.

So, I mean, if you ignore the various points where I've actually specifically stated my position then yeah, I've avoided stating my position.

Unfortunately, you'll have to pardon me if people like you choose to ignore that specific statement of my position to assert that I'm putting forward a completely different position and instead of restating it for the 15th time, I just say to go look at my actual posts to find where I've said it.

[Malevicton]

I wonder if there's something like Godwin's Law for having to define Strawman arguments. If not then I've found something new to do with my day. Regardless of which specific fallacy he may or may not have employed, it was not an argument that supported anything that he'd said previously.

Or I guess we just go with everyone in this thread are jerks. That does seem much simpler.

The only question really is how much of an increase.

negligible. We don't really need to guess. Parsers in mmos are not unexplored territory.

Given how off put you seem to be by so many people misinterpreting you, would you mind specifying your position? It seems very ambiguous atm, and tbh you don't seem to have a position besides deconstructing other people's.

[Aiselia]

negligible.

Prove it. SE thinks that the number is high enough to warrant not allowing it, so they're the ones you have to convince. Prove it.

would you mind specifying your position?

Here, I'll just repeat what I added to the previous post because you may have missed the edit:

then claim he can't be wrong because he never had a position.

Just because:
I've never said that.

In fact, I've stated my position a few times.

In fact, I quoted it a few times in a single post to someone who didn't read it before incorrectly trying to state my position.

Here, I'll help you because you obviously missed it despite the fact that you quoted something from that post (and then try to say I take things out of context...).

people like me who want a personal parser so people can improve but don't see how the subjective benefits of a party parser objectively outweigh what SE expects will happen?

that's not my claim. That's SE's fear. It's irrelevant if I make that claim because you still have to prove SE wrong. If I stayed out of this thread completely? Yeah, SE would still think the same thing.

I have zero problems with personal parsers to be allowed to see one's own output so they can improve if they care, and that that would be a safe middle ground for SE to implement because they can still maintain their current policy of not bringing up others' specific DPS because they shouldn't be able to see someone else's with a personal parser.

I'm completely fine with parsers as long as they don't create extra jerks and that I'm all for a personal parser for people to see their own DPS to improve because that's the safest middle ground for SE to let people get their numbers to see if they have room for improvement without risking extra jerks calling people out on their DPS.

So, I mean, if you ignore the various points where I've actually specifically stated my position then yeah, I've avoided stating my position.

Unfortunately, you'll have to pardon me if people like you choose to ignore that specific statement of my position to assert that I'm putting forward a completely different position and instead of restating it for the 15th time, I just say to go look at my actual posts to find where I've said it.

[Viridiana]

To be honest, I'm kind of scared that people thought my story about being kicked over not eating a completely non-edible food instead a completely non-existing food was meant to be serious. :/

Honestly, I didn't even pay attention to those parts, I just paid attention to the fact that it came right after I used "someone would have mentioned that by now" as an argument.

Do you really think I care about my credibility when I've specifically said I'm not anti-parser and then people jump at me for being anti-parser?

Well, I mean, we argued for how long about whether or not parsers should be allowed, and I was on the pro-parse side, and you were arguing against me, so clearly you're anti-parser. You casual scrub, you.