The issue nobody wants to address

[Kosmos992k]

You know that you were quite offensive yourself in this thread? ^.^

I used sarcasm, folks didn't like it, I stopped. However, I did not attack anyone, though I was certainly critical of some ideas and opinions.

On different matter - we can't let the playerbase suffer players that aren't cooperative enough, just to protect the less able few.

I agree that the player-base doesn't need to suffer uncooperative players, but I honestly do not see generally available parsing of individual players performance data as a solution to that. I don't believe that a player who is being uncooperative will suddenly become cooperative simply because someone can show numerically that they are the worst performer in the party. I'm not opposed to parsers to protect a less able few, I'm against them because I don't think that bringing a more competitive and critical tone to the community will be productive or healthy for the community in the long run.

Actually, if you read through my posts, and I think you have and already know, but I'll spell it out for others, I'm not totally opposed to the use of parsers. I think that they can be tools that have a use in end-game. I'd also agree that a parser would be useful if a a group wanted to practice together in a party trying their rotations out in real combat. These are all instances where the use of a parser is contained within the private context of the group using it. Where I draw the line is having a parser just out there that anyone can look at which lists players by their DPS score whether they want it to or not.

Actually, now I have said that, there is one thing that SE could do and I wouldn't care at all about how they implement parsing. Make the parser an opt-in tool. In other words, add a setting to the character information that let's you opt into being parsed if you don't mind, but by default leaves you opted out of the parser. That way those who want to use a parser can, but the scope for abusing the in-game parser would be more or less eliminated.

I still stand by all my comments about unrestricted us of parsers and parse data, I still think they are useful tools in the right contexts and I still oppose their general introduction for all. However by making participation in parsing a configurable option, my objection can be removed.

[Malevicton]

Actually, now I have said that, there is one thing that SE could do and I wouldn't care at all about how they implement parsing. Make the parser an opt-in tool. In other words, add a setting to the character information that let's you opt into being parsed if you don't mind, but by default leaves you opted out of the parser. That way those who want to use a parser can, but the scope for abusing the in-game parser would be more or less eliminated.

Personal parsers would've been a great option at launch. Now people already have other options, so it's not like you can keep that information from other players if they want to know. That option simply doesn't exist, so whether or not it would be a good option is irrelevant.

All a personal parser would do at this point is continue to keep console players more restricted than pc.

I don't know why this bears repeating, but allowing parsers wouldn't make harassment okay. If people are griefing you with a parser, just report them like you would now.

[OPneedNerfs]

#pcmasterrace

[Kosmos992k]

Personal parsers would've been a great option at launch. Now people already have other options, so it's not like you can keep that information from other players if they want to know. That option simply doesn't exist, so whether or not it would be a good option is irrelevant.

All a personal parser would do at this point is continue to keep console players more restricted than pc.

That's not what I mean. I mean add a full parser, but if a player has not chosen to allow their damage to be parsed by others, their numbers will simply be blank.

No more replies today, so I'm replying here

I know what you meant. What I mean is people would just continue to use 3rd party parsers since those would have more information. Hiding your damage is not an option. Whether it would be a good option doesn't matter.

SE's parser would have access to the full damage including accurate DoT, which 3rd party parsers don't have. By making participation in that parser optional, you make it so that players can change the option whenever they want or need to. For example when working with a group to practice something, you could enable the parsing for that time and disable it afterwards, it's your choice.

Adding a full parser with a participation option not only meets the needs of those who want to use an accurate parser in-game, but also grants the players their choice of whether or not to participate in parsing at any time. I don't see how you can reasonably be against that.

Of course players still have the option of using unsanctioned 3rd party tools, why would that change?

No more posts today thank yo very much forum limits...so another reply added here.

I like your suggestion, but in my opinion it would cause more toxicity than simple parser.

If the parsing is optional, players will wonder why would you turn it off. The first thing that comes to mind is that you want to hide something. What do you want to hide? Low dps. So you do not plan to contribute enough then? And here we get seed for toxic confrontation no matter your reasoning behind turning it off.

Several posters have echoed this thought, and I'm answering your post since your is most concise.

What seems to me is being said is that either all players must be compellled to allow their data to be parsed, because some in the community will react toxically to players exercising their right to opt out. So, prejudging othes ans suspicion are arguments for having a parser free-for all?

If giving players control of whether they can be parsed or not is a compromise that parser proponents cannot accept, then doesn't this entire discussion amount to parser proponents saying give us what we want, there is no compromise? Malevicton has already clearly stated that whether or not SE implements a parser, 3rd party tools will continue to be used. Which kind of amounts to saying, if SE give players the choice to opt out, we'll just use 3rd party tools and get you that way.

So what is left to discuss? An opt-in parser is unacceptable, and if implemented would be circumvented - according to Malevicton. So, really the discussion is over, compromise wont work and parser proponents clearly won't quit, so in effect parser users are forcing the player base of the game to submit to their will. Did I miss anything there?

[Malevicton]

That's not what I mean. I mean add a full parser, but if a player has not chosen to allow their damage to be parsed by others, their numbers will simply be blank.

I know what you meant. What I mean is people would just continue to use 3rd party parsers since those would have more information. Hiding your damage is not an option. Whether it would be a good option doesn't matter.

Edit @ your edit: If their parser tracks dots then they'll have added dots to the damage log. That's the only reason they aren't tracked by 3rd party parser. Unless they're planning to hold partial logs server side specifically to cripple 3rd party software then it wouldn't matter. Given that their servers can barely handle a light breeze, and it would only be to cripple other software without adding anything to the game, I doubt that'd be the solution. It'd be way easier to run the parser itself client side anyways, which means the log would need to be on the client. Technically it's possible, but they'd have to design a lot of new stuff specifically to spite 3rd party parsers at the cost of their precious server space. Given how insanely (almost literally insanely) easier it'd be to just implement a normal parser, I really doubt they'd do that. Besides, if someone's refusing to be parsed then I'll take simulated dots over literally nothing.

If they intentionally make their parser have less functionality than current parsers (which is what you're asking for), then people will continue to go 3rd party. And as you've said, they aren't going anywhere. So what's the point of making an intentionally gimped product with no intention of people using it? That's not a compromise, it's just a waste of resources.

[Archaell]

That's not what I mean. I mean add a full parser, but if a player has not chosen to allow their damage to be parsed by others, their numbers will simply be blank.

I like your suggestion, but in my opinion it would cause more toxicity than simple parser.

If the parsing is optional, players will wonder why would you turn it off. The first thing that comes to mind is that you want to hide something. What do you want to hide? Low dps. So you do not plan to contribute enough then? And here we get seed for toxic confrontation no matter your reasoning behind turning it off.

[Urthdigger]

If I see a player refuse to be parsed, I'm going to assume they're the problem when DPS checks aren't being met.

[raelgun]

There is no contradiction, except that in your own head.

Have you read your own posts here? No really have you because I am reading them and you have contradicted your self, call me unreasonable but if you think I am being combative, stop being over sensitive then, it doesn't help your cause if thats all you have is hurting other peoples feelings, theres actually nothing wrong with people butting heads like this, trying to change the game or enforce a anti critical environment is whats killing this game and making people really go at each others throats more then any other mmo community seen to date.

[Whiteroom]

I like your suggestion, but in my opinion it would cause more toxicity than simple parser.

If the parsing is optional, players will wonder why would you turn it off. The first thing that comes to mind is that you want to hide something. What do you want to hide? Low dps. So you do not plan to contribute enough then? And here we get seed for toxic confrontation no matter your reasoning behind turning it off.

This, the suggestion she made is just one of someone who hasn't even thought the whole thing through, whether or not you are playing well, those abusive players that she so fears, will automatically assume that you are hiding low numbers. It's a little comical when people suggest it.
It's even more funny after having her say this:

I think you need to learn more about human nature.

If I see a player refuse to be parsed, I'm going to assume they're the problem when DPS checks aren't being met.

As will everyone else, unless something is glaringly obvious with the numbers shown. Also, if there are four dps, and you know you need roughly 600dps each to pass the content, and three are showing 650, while the other is blank, well...

Besides, it's not like harassment or griefing would suddenly not be reportable.

^This, it's like people think that SE adding a parser means they are sitting there saying "Alright trolls! The game is now yours! Make the world burn!"

[Evangela]

I'm not against parser. It's hard to improve yourselves if you don't know what you're doing wrong. That's why we always have exams, to see if we're ready to be graduated and work with the others.