New ToS gives hope for official DPS meters?

[Penthea]

Lack of knowledge and laziness makes people act shitty without parsers. There's situations when people will give you crap because they think you're doing something wrong based on their lack of knowledge, while checking ACT would immiedietly prove them wrong - but you can't talk about it so have fun with them talking shit.

There is something to be said about giving people less tools to be horrible to one another. WoW's community was quite a lot like FFXIV's before parsers were commonly used; most people only cared if things died and if they got loot. The atmosphere in WoW changed for the worse after everyone and their mother got a parser. I fail to see how it would be any different in FFXIV.

I am simply annoyed with people who have no idea how the resource works and still talk crap about anybody who uses it as well as general misinformation that it's "just an elitist dps leader-boards that provides no context". I mean you've even claimed the logs don't show positioning, in a reply to the very post in which I've already said they do. You've corrected yourself once called out, but still.

The reason why I am not super familiar with FFlogs is frankly I don't feel qualified to look through it in the depth that my team sometimes requires. I know a lot about healer classes and that's kind of it. There are players in my static who have played significantly more classes at a higher level than I have and they're far better at theorycrafting as well, so I trust them to look for the information. Furthermore, I don't know what it is about ACT, but if anyone in my house uses it everyone gets horrendous lag so I have no access to a parser, which means I can't upload logs.

I will be asking why they don't look at FFlogs for positioning, though in our defence we have had confusion about positioning only around three times in more than a year. So the option to -see- where everyone is standing from a log is something we rarely needed. I can't even remember the last time we needed that information. I can only recall that we did at some points.

But I don't think me being unaware that you could look at positioning in FFLogs automatically makes every argument I have made against introducing parsers irrelevant. It is true most people don't have the knowledge to use them properly, it is true many are too lazy to upload logs to get a clearer picture, and it is true that while it can be a useful and helpful tool it can also be used for the exact opposite with ease.

[Dualgunner]

A parsing thread? What is this, January 2018?

The debate's kind of been run dry several times over. To this day I haven't seen more than anecdotal evidence supporting the claim that parsers make a community more toxic. So far the only good point I've seen posted has been "There's something to be said about not giving people more tools to be toxic to each other," but that gets turned around to the point I can easily say the chatbox should be removed from the game with the exact same logic. I would even wager that chatboxes are a much stronger tool for toxicity than parsers ever have been or will be.

Saw a claim that FFLogs is just contextless e-peen flexing also. Some people do use it as that. My group uses it to gauge a lot of things; where healing and mitigation would be optimal based on outgoing boss damage and the best times to line up dps burst windows to name a few key team coordinations that FFLogs worked great as a tool to allow us to do.

[Penthea]

The debate's kind of been run dry several times over. To this day I haven't seen more than anecdotal evidence supporting the claim that parsers make a community more toxic.

By the same vein a person could say they haven't seen more than anecdotal evidence that the presence of parsers wouldn't fuel toxicity.

This is one of the reasons why this debate is endless. Everyone's argument is anecdotal. And those that aren't are dismissed as an irregularity by those who oppose the argument. We're doomed to go in circles.

[Dualgunner]

By the same vein a person could say they haven't seen more than anecdotal evidence that the presence of parsers wouldn't fuel toxicity.

This is one of the reasons why this debate is endless. Everyone's argument is anecdotal. And those that aren't are dismissed as an irregularity by those who oppose the argument. This debate is never ending.

That's when we get into burden of proof. I want a parser; the answer is no, because they make communities toxic.

The burden of proof then lies on the answerer in this situation to prove that parsers make communities more toxic. Or in other terms, I can't prove a negative (Parsers don't fuel toxicity) but you must prove the positive (parsers do).

[Penthea]

That's when we get into burden of proof. I want a parser; the answer is no, because they make communities toxic.

The burden of proof then lies on the answerer in this situation to prove that parsers make communities more toxic.

No the burden of proof is on both sides. A person would also have to present proof as to why the opposition's concerns are nothing to worry about.

[Dualgunner]

No the burden of proof is on both sides. A person would also have to present proof as to why the opposition's concerns are nothing to worry about.

For the specific claim "Parsers make a community more toxic," the burden of proof is on the people making that claim, not on the people who just want ingame parsers.

[Penthea]

For the specific claim "Parsers make a community more toxic," the burden of proof is on the people making that claim, not on the people who just want ingame parsers.

Have you never presented an idea to someone before? You have never shown someone something, and they ask "but what about X?" and you were expected to give an answer?

This is how introducing anything new works. Both sides present their arguments for what they think should be done and give answers, with proof if possible, to any questions. The burden of proof is absolutely not only on the person being presented with something new. What xD

[Satarn]

The reason why I am not super familiar with FFlogs is frankly I don't feel qualified to look through it in the depth that my team sometimes requires.
(...) But I don't think me being unaware that you could look at positioning in FFLogs automatically makes every argument I have made against introducing parsers irrelevant.

I never said it makes all your arguments irrelevant. I merely used the example to illustrate how, just as you couldn't even be bothered to fully read my post before responding, many people can't be bothered to learn what data parsing really provides, before they completely condemn it and people involved.

You also admit to not being very familiar with features of fflogs and yet you thought it fitting to make a statement, about what information it does and does not provide, which you worded as if it was a fact.

Honestly I don't even have a beef with you or your opinion. Just with misinformation which is so often spread in such threads.