Tank dps harrasment

[Xerek]

Well, this was unexpected. Earlier in the thread there was discussion that FFLogs could be misused to shame and harrass someone. Now, KaldeaSahaline has done just that. Without provication, she brought up Anguel's O1S log in what was a blatently obvious attempt to shame. Seems to have worked, since Anguel hasn't posted since. Let's look at Kaldea's reasoning...

"Anguel has poor numbers on an O1S log, as such they are in no position to argue about what makes a tank good, and what they say should be disregarded outright."

Do I have it? Alright. This is, of course, utterly false. Don't believe me? Let me substitute...see if this sounds right to you.

"I can't really throw a football well. My throw speed and accuracy percentage pale to that of an NFL quarterback. Therefore I am in no position to argue what makes a good quarterback and any opinion I try to make on the matter should be outright discarded as a result."

Hmm...wait, that doesn't sound right, does it? Let's try this, then...

"I have trouble with faking expressions, and when I try and fool someone it's a dead giveaway. My ability to convince someone I'm not who I really am pales to that of an actor. Therefore, I am in no position to argue what makes a good actor, and any opinion I express in that regard should be discarded outright, based on my shortcomings."

...no, that sounds silly too. When in a debate, you attack the point, not the person. The only time the person is attacked is if the attacker is being petty, or finds the point to hard to attack. Honestly, bringing up their log to shame them was uncalled for and as I pointed out above, outright erroneous. And I'm happy to see you catching well-deserved flak over it, even from people that otherwise supported you. In using FFLogs to shame him, you have single-handedly embodied all the concerns raised about FFLogs earlier in this thread.

[HoodRat]

bad examples are bad

Try this: "I'm a significantly worse quarterback than those in the NFL, so my opinions on how to be a good quarterback are much less valuable than their opinions."

When in a debate, you attack the point, not the person.

The irony is not lost on me.

[Xerek]

Try this: "I'm a significantly worse quarterback than those in the NFL, so my opinions on how to be a good quarterback are much less valuable than their opinions."



The irony is not lost on me.

Except she said nothing of the sort. She said his opinions were meaningless, not less valuable. Nice try attempting to downplay and sugercoat her words. If I have to, I can go back and quote her directly, but that would waste time for me and make you look foolish, so it would be a lose/lose for the both of us.

[Oscura]

She said his opinions were meaningless, not less valuable.

Your definition of what qualifies as a good tank is to be taken with a grain of salt. I apologize for being blunt, but it needs to be said.

Tell me what part of the world where the idiom "take with a grain of salt" means "meaningless," because last I checked, it meant "should be held with skepticism," which was actually correct even if it was rude.

[HoodRat]

Except she said nothing of the sort. She said his opinions were meaningless, not less valuable. Nice try attempting to downplay and sugercoat her words. If I have to, I can go back and quote her directly, but that would waste time for me and make you look foolish, so it would be a lose/lose for the both of us.

I'll help you out.

You did almost 1/3 the DPS of your co-tank in O1S today. I did almost 30% MORE DPS than you do now when I was ilvl 298 doing Lakshmi EX. I'd be curious what ilvl you are.

Your definition of what qualifies as a good tank is to be taken with a grain of salt. I apologize for being blunt, but it needs to be said.

[Dualgunner]

...no, that sounds silly too. When in a debate, you attack the point, not the person. The only time the person is attacked is if the attacker is being petty, or finds the point to hard to attack. Honestly, bringing up their log to shame them was uncalled for and as I pointed out above, outright erroneous.

Are you saying that when somebody makes an argument from authority, it is erroneous to check if that authority is valid?