People advertising they're running Parsers

[Yahallo]

Well I never said you mentioned any other 3rd party program. What i was saying was based on the higher standard comment you made. Statics that usually require a specific parse tend to also be ones that use call out "stuff". So by having to rely on such a thing, they can't really claim to have higher standards given they use a crutch like that. Wasn't saying you said it at all, so I apologize if it came off that way, was just going by what i seen over the years. Cause its a bit hypocritical if any groups if they only want certain parses but also rely on that "thing" to even clear content.

As for checks, as long as people do the SSS and can clear it in the set time, well they can do the damage required to clear the content the SSS is for. Rotations wise, again well SSS is what comes into play really. Ppl also do just pure theory craft which also leads to rotations being created without a parser. Using both would easily let one do what dmg they have to, to clear the content without a parser even needed.

SSS can let you get away with somethings that you wouldn't be able to in an actual fight. Part of the rotation optimization is adapting it to the fight at hand, and figuring out what you are doing with that downtime, or adjusting it so you don't end up losing a GCD when you don't have to. Theory crafters use parsers to test out their rotations. Parsing is a necessary part of raiding, always has been and always will be. SSS isn't a good enough substitute. It is possible to clear SSS, but still not be able to adapt to the actual fight.

As for the higher standard being hypocritical, it's more of choosing how they want to spend time. Training someone is a time investment, time that the static may not have. Sometimes the static loses a member due to real life and they want to get a replacement that is on par rather than having to go back and spend time training someone up to be the replacement. It's not really a crutch, but just wanting someone at the same level you are. Also, I am pretty sure there are plenty that refuse people cordially, you just don't hear about it because people talk about the bad more than they talk about the good. Again, parsers are not the issue, people are the issue.

Saraide, Ill answer this.

We all make mistakes, we all stuff up in one way or another and yes we do learn from those mistakes. What we do not need, want, or appreciate is having our noses rubbed in it PUBLICALLY.

Nor is it necessary to get the point across.

I said this before, but Ill restate the principle. Publically humiliating or embarrassing someone does zero to address any errors, whatever you have to say that you THINK is constructive no longer matters, as whoever you are berating IS NOT LISTENING to a single word.

All they see and hear is a loudmouth, tactless creep.

Staff management manual, book one, page one.

It is not what you say, it is how you say it, to whom, and where.

If you read EtherRose's post, they didn't care about whether people were public about it or not, they just wanted anyone who used it to be banned regardless of how they used it, even if they never mentioned it. Nothing about those who humiliate or berate others and the like, just if you use a parser ban period. They are claiming that parsers are all negative and no positive, so your response to Saraide isn't really valid considering what they were responding to. So this particular argument at the moment isn't about how you saying something, people are currently arguing over just using a parser right now.