Its time to remove job-based glamour restrictions.

[Gemina]

There's no confusion. You're just wrong and haven't figured it out yet.

Incorrect. I can't be at fault if your bigotry clouds your comprehension.

Role locked gear would be shared within a role, but monks can't share with bards can't share with black mages. That's because the gear isn't locked based on role, rather on primary stat and some vague notion of armor class.

Though I doubt anything else I say will allow you to see the picture since you just seem to like to argue, I will still try to spell it out...

Gear restricted by role DOES exist. Fact. Don't believe me, grab your tank or DPS job of choice, and glam a healing set to it. The DPS role however is different. This is because within the DPS role, they are further segregated based on how the job operates (caster, melee, ranged). This is not the case for the other two roles in the game (healer and tank). Within those two particular roles, all the gear is shared.

You're trying to beat into my head what I am already well aware of. All I am saying is despite the fact that further restrictions are placed on jobs belonging to the DPS role, they all still fall under the DPS category. Furthermore, main stat alone doesn't separate the jobs. Have you noticed that NINs, MCHs, and BRDs share accessories despite one being melee and the others ranged?

The groupings that are common in endgame gear aren't the only ones either, and presumably not the only ones the OP wants removed. There are also Disciple of War/Magic restrictions, as well as shared DRG/tank armor. Again, this is because the armor in this game isn't role locked.

Pretty sure OP wants all restrictions removed. It is typical from a player who uses bikini tanks and chocobo suit glams as the base of their arguments. Again though, gear in this game IS ROLE LOCKED. If it wasn't, I would be able to put that lovely Arachne Short of Scouting on one or all of my healers. But I can't. Because it's ROLE LOCKED.

Also, even if you had used deductive reasoning (you used inductive), deductive reasoning absolutely can be disputed as either invalid or unsound. I'm not sure why you'd think otherwise if you had any idea what it actually means and weren't just invoking it to try to give your argument an air of authority.

I am aware of how the two forms of logic work. Just because you attempt to dispute my statements doesn't make them disputable.