Tank dps harrasment

[Dualgunner]

How is making a feature opt in a nuclear option? I am asking for more crosswalks and extended time for pedestrians to cross the street. That is all, will it inconvenience people sure, but far from the fact of forcing them to alter their commute. No one has proof on this subject, though if something has the potential to prevent even one case without causing people to change their very way of being why not do it? I have never stated to have proof, but if the potential is there to even prevent one case shouldn't it be looked at?

It's the nuclear option because you're asking for official action on a third party site. The moment Square has to act on it, their only option is to shut the whole thing down given their official stance on parsing.

And the problem is, no. You cannot prove there is even the potential to prevent one singular case; you can't even prove that this wouldn't cause even more harassment than it solves. That's why you don't do it; you don't act without the proper data, because if you do there's the chance you hurt more people than you help.

In the end only people that can prove anything is SE, leaving that aside though if a change like opt-in even removes one case of harassment isn't that an okay trade off? I mean to upload the data we have to create an account anyways, so making it opt-in would not change much of anything just adds an extra step after the account creation on FFLogs.

You don't know if it would even remove one case of harassment. As I've pointed out, it's more likely to cause more cases of harassment. If you prevent one case of harassment, but cause two more, what did you really do in the long run?

if opt-in will prevent even one person from getting looked up on logs and then proceed to called a shitter instead of simply saying sorry you do not met our groups requirements, and making it opt-in has been proven (by only people that can SE) to have no impact on the game why not make the change?

Where has it been proven? Up till now you claimed no evidence, but now you just made a claim that needs evidence.
Opt in will not prevent one person from being looked up on FFlogs. It will cause the phrase "Open logs or kick" to become mainstream. It will cause more harassment than it already does. Get off your moral "If I can just save one person..." crusade, because by saving that one theoretical person you're opening up who knows how many more to worse scrutiny.

I have always prefixed this if it has the potential to help even just a little by SE why not give it a try? Where is the harm? In the end though only way to prove something is to try it.

Because the only action they can take regarding FFLogs is to destroy it, given their official stance on parsers. If they acted in any other way, they'd be endorsing parsers; their neutral position up until now is a big "If I don't see it, it's not a problem" which stops them from directly acting on sites like FFLogs.

If they were to do what you suggested, they might as well implement a first-party system, break FFLogs, and then host their own damage leaderboards. The forums would be on the brightest fire you can imagine.