Tank dps harrasment

[KaldeaSahaline]

Not really you would still have the ability to use it with like minded players. So how does it destroy that. Adds an extra hoop, but far from destroys the tool. While the data has no impact on me, I love FFLogs. Still does not change that for some it does have a negative impact and that the tools SE has put in place does not protect players from the abuse of said data only provides them the tools to further prevent such abuse from the same player.


An opt-in would make it so you would not have data on the tank that barely pulls 2k dps. For your static or for groups that request them you show them your logs world keeps moving. All the opt-in feature does is that no one will be able to pull the logs on random joe.

I said this earlier, who is negatively impacted? If you never set foot in any form of challenging content you will never (.000006% chance) be harassed. That's already the largest subsection of the playerbase by the community's own statement.

If you do participate in said content, but want to hide stuff, it's because you know you want a carry and don't deserve it.

If you do participate in said content and are decent you don't care because your numbers speak for yourself.

There's LITERALLY only one subset of player that is affected by this and frankly they're just upset that the gravy train ended. No more getting carried through EX's or Savage when they can barely press buttons.

The tools value is as high as it is because of how open and easy it is to view the data. As soon as you start forcing people to opt in, participation can drop, and now selection of data for people to compare against drops and you end up doing a lot of damage to the tools usefulness. If I'm a 40th percentile player and want to get better I can't just look up the rank 1 log and get good. It doesn't work that way. I need to peruse the middle section of say 80th percentile logs to find a good player with a similar comp and kill time. If you start removing all these people from searches you run into issues for anyone looking to get better.

Ya know...I had a large post plotted out in my head, filled with rebuttals and all ready to verbally duke it out over this point and while typing it out and thinking on what responses I would get. I started getting all stressed out and wound up. I then asked myself "What's the point?" and I couldn't answer. Wound myself up for something that generally doesn't effect me much and such, over a point that I doubt I could change minds so thoroughly made up about. So...yeah, heck it. I concede, you're right, I'm wrong. Just want to get rid of this stressed feeling. I mean, I still believe in the points I made but...I just don't wanna argue it anymore when the stress from the argument, combined with work stress, starts causing me actual, physical pain in my shoulders and neck. So, yeah. Again, I concede.

I hope you have a nice day and I hope you have fun with the game. Take care.

StarRosie over and out.

Going forward my advice to you would be to make sure when debating/discussing topics don't get emotionally invested or mad. Not only does it completely ruin most people's flow of logic, but it prevents you from ever being open to changing your mind. Try to focus on specific examples and quantifiable data so it's logic driven instead. These two things can really mess up a healthy discussion.

Hopefully your work situation eases up. We may be on opposite sides of the discussion, but we are not enemies. Best of luck and happy thanksgiving!

While I ultimately don't see a need for opt-in, as one can simply say "this parse is one that's actually representative of what all I can do" and just link that if it somehow came down to it, there's no reason, especially in an official tool, that an opt-in model would break the system. You still publish your own battle log, encounter time, and thereby raid dps, which is likely all that matters to you, but if anyone else wishes to also publish their information, they can choose to do so, or perhaps even contextually automate that decision (opt-in to all parses with these players, and out of any others). Unless you wish to argue that including parse publications that the player is not aware of makes his metrics more authentic or relevantly informative, neither would the purpose be in any way lost by making the publication optional.

See above for my response to breaking the system.

:: Just in principle, I hugely dislike the idea of "opt out". It means inconveniencing yourself each and every time, especially if the choice cannot be automated, and still possibly losing the choice by lack of notice or notification. If it's benign enough to be "opt out", it really needn't be optional at all. But if reasonably perceivable, in whomever's eyes, to be in whatever way threatening enough to need to be optional, then it should be opt in, not out. Just my personal preference in these regards.

I'm only 46% sure (because I've never personally done it), but once you opt out, it's a one and done thing. All further logs are always opted out. If I am wrong please let me know. I am no expert on that bit.

While things definitely do not hit that hard in this game, tankbusters do still need at least cooldowns to survive. Tank stance, no. Cooldowns, yes. I fondly recall one of the tanks in my static forgetting to CD for Exfaust’s Thunder III in V4S, dying, and then Exfaust turning around to finish the job on the poor unsuspecting melee. Always amusing when that happens, though.

Agreed, that's specifically why I mentioned tank stance and not CDs . Although I may or may not have one time taken an Aero 3 to the face completely unmitigated and lived (#shoutout to my healers).

The thing about anecdotes is that they cannot be used as any sort of quantifiable or quantitative evidence; they are already skewed in the fact that they are a personal experience, so emotions are going to get in the way as opposed to if the data presented by either side were cold, hard numbers. They cannot be used as a reliable source of data for either side. So, while they cannot be used as an adequate reason to slow/deny change, they also cannot be used as an adequate reason to prompt swift/sudden change. Because they’re anecdotes. There’s a reason why they are never used in serious research and/or debates.

On one hand I agree that anecdotes aren't super quantifiable, but on the other I quite like reading anecdotes. It really helps me understand WHY someone holds the stance they do. It can help lend credence to the facts they supplied, or draw attention to holes in a persons argument and help me guide them to better see my POV.

I don't need to change someones mind. I really don't (unless it's hilariously and obviously wrong). I just want to understand WHY they hold their view, and have them understand WHY I hold mine. I think that's why I like anecdotes.

With respect to this discussion, I tend to have a really hard time understanding where "FFLogs is bad" type of people are coming from.