Question about FFLogs

[MariaArvana]

Has the owner of that site ever said why it isn't opt-in?

TLR, for it to truly be opt-in would require ACT to also become an opt-in program. (I.E: ACT would have to include a blacklist of player names not to parse in its function)

He mentioned so long as ACT parses everyone in the party, it'd be trivial for someone to create a second website that'd reveal the non-opted in names of people if he ever made FFlogs opt-in since ACT still stores that data on the parse file. He then explained It's even happened when a bunch of Chinese players created a Chinese version of FFlogs, and that exposed every hidden name on FFlogs anyway since ACT still keeps track of that info.

He also humorously noted how in the many years of running WoWlogs, he's never had the request to hide away data, it's only ever been a request from FF14 players.

Nevermind the example of bad parse history; I don't want to get into a series of hypotheticals. However, what about using that string in your profile to hide logs? If the party leader tells you straight out, "you can't play with us because you hide your parses" and proceeds to kick you - is that not harassment? What do you call that?

I'd call it a fair reason to remove someone, so long as they aren't a jerk about it. This game's endgame content relies all around Hard enrages; mathematical equations that are extremely binary if you fail or not. When someone's out to complete Titan for example, I wouldn't fault that person for being hesitant for not wanting to party with someone that has their logs hidden. Bringing someone in who is obfuscated in their performance is a risk, you could get lucky or not. But between the choice of waiting for someone who has the performance AND shows it off vs someone who may or may not have the performance, potentially wasting lots of time if their performance isn't up to snuff, its easy to see why people would choose the former.

I see it as no different than not wanting to play with someone who claims "they've seen enrage, just need a good group." or "This is an alt." In all scenarios you're taking a gamble, and not wanting to take it due to lack of information available to you is not harassment. (Unless they straight up insult you/claim your performance must suck because you're hiding your numbers, etc, then that's harassment.) That being said, if anyone ever mentions parses in-game, they're asking for a report when they could simply say "sorry X, we got a friend coming" as a fib reason to remove a person.

[HakaseNyan]

I'd call it a fair reason to remove someone, so long as they aren't a jerk about it. This game's endgame content relies all around Hard enrages; mathematical equations that are extremely binary if you fail or not. When someone's out to complete Titan for example, I wouldn't fault that person for being hesitant for not wanting to party with someone that has their logs hidden. Bringing someone in who is obfuscated in their performance is a risk, you could get lucky or not. But between the choice of waiting for someone who has the performance AND shows it off vs someone who may or may not have the performance, potentially wasting lots of time if their performance isn't up to snuff, its easy to see why people would choose the former.

I see it as no different than not wanting to play with someone who claims "they've seen enrage, just need a good group." or "This is an alt." In all scenarios you're taking a gamble, and not wanting to take it due to lack of information available to you is not harassment. (Unless they straight up insult you/claim your performance must suck because you're hiding your numbers, etc, then that's harassment.) That being said, if anyone ever mentions parses in-game, they're asking for a report when they could simply say "sorry X, we got a friend coming" as a fib reason to remove a person.

Look, I agree with the reasoning. The party lead has the final say no matter what. However, it's a unique situation where the party lead has 3rd party knowledge to use against the person wishing to join. If the leader brings up this knowledge, he or she gets in trouble for mentioning it and kicking the person. If the leader doesn't bring up this knowledge, he or she gets away with kicking the person. In one situation the person wishing to join can report the leader; the other he or she can't. If the person joining can't prove the reasoning behind their exclusion - are they even being harassed?

Anyway, ACT and FFLogs seem like such handy tools, and I feel I must reiterate that I do not use them or run the content that they are used for. I have a friend that was actually harassed over parsing shenanigans, and I have read plenty of statements from others about it too. Though, I do like to wonder what things would be like without these tools; Having to waste time failing duties with people you don't know a thing about sure sounds awful.