The Real Problem with Parsers

[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.

[Malevicton]

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.

Well, there's the very next sentence of my post that you clipped out: "We don't really need to guess. Parsers in mmos are not unexplored territory. "

That position isn't really specific. There are a lot of vague qualifiers (like "as long as they don't create extra jerks"), and you rely heavily on it being SE's opinion without ever really backing it up.

Edit: You aren't SE's spokesperson. Here are some actual quotes:

"This is a very difficult question to answer. We are first and foremost a software company, and as a software company we cannot really approve of anyone modifying our product in any way. We would prefer it if everyone played within the original design of the software, otherwise we can’t really guarantee the quality of the product itself. Officially, the policy is that any additions or modification to the game are against the rules and privacy policy and when playing our game, everyone has to have gone through the steps to agree to the Terms and Conditions when you sign up.

However, I too am a hardcore PC gamer so I understand that there are a lot of plug-ins and add-ons available to many games. So as a PC gamer, all I can really say is “Please, don’t get caught.” If you are going to use add-ons and plug-ins please be discrete about it. Don’t go around telling your friends you mod the game on chat, or ask a GM if using such an add-on is ok. We can’t really go around and check if add-ons and plug-ins will work with our game and debug it, and check that it doesn’t break anything – its too much. Really what it comes down to is I can’t really say “Yes” to these things, and players have to realize that by using an application that accesses game files that they are the ones that are assuming the risk of viruses and possibly compromising their account.

And as you probably know, Final Fantasy XI had a particularly strict policy on this kind of thing, so there are quite a few players out there who moved from XI to XIV who definitely view any kind of add-on to the game as bad. So please, just be discrete if you will be using tools or add-ons."

-http://gamerescape.com/2014/02/12/ps4-media-tour-interview-with-naoki-yoshida/

You can also watch this interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-WX...outu.be&t=6m4s where he never mentions harassment. Obviously they don't want people being jerks to each other, but they've never said that they think parsers would exacerbate that. That's something a group of players on these forums think.

Stop making up dev positions.

"As long as they don't create extra jerks" isn't vague at all.

Screw it, I'm done.