I was almost in the mood to play FF14 again

[Renathras]

I would say absolutely not. The smn just missed badly in depth.

SMN is fine as a Job, and the most I've enjoyed SMN since 2.5. Each expansion after made the Job worse and worse, and now it's back to being coherent again. I do think it should have been a separate Job and the mess that was old SMN retained in some way for people that liked it, but in vacuum, if it had just been added as a new Job so the jaded old SMN players who loved that Frankenstein's monster held together by duct tape and wishes weren't up in arms about losing the thing they loved, it'd be far less hated than it is now since it would be looked at largely as RDM/DNC 2.0. RDM was also called easy and barebones, but people liked it, and its original forms did NOT have much more depth (or any more depth) than current SMN.

I feel like you're the kind of guy who sees "100% orange juice" and start yelling at the store manager,

No, I'm not.

When you're engaged in a discussion, and you're employing RAMPANT hyperbole to support a position, it's fair for someone to point out you shouldn't be doing that and you're wrong. When you're using it as one of the KEY ARGUMENTS in favor of your position, it's MORE than fair for people to point out it's wrong. And when you accuse them of moving goalposts and other ad hominems, trying to bring up completely unrelated discussions and so on to discredit them instead of just admitting "Yes, we're lying to get what we want", then there's reason for them to not give you the time of day AFTER pointing it out.

Unanimous isn't a "mere concept". Rare it is, but there are some things that everyone agrees on. There are times that Parliament/Congress holds a vote and there are no dissenting voices. There are times that groups of people have complete agreement on specific points of things. Some things are, in fact, sometimes unanimous. Meaning when you say unanimous, that actually means something. It means no one disagrees and there is no dissent, PERIOD.

And yes, you shouldn't use such a thing when it's not true.

That's when you use terms like majority or plurality, though for that, you need some kind of official source or tally, not a non-scientific poll equivalent of counting Likes in a medium that has no controls for people voting more than once, brigading votes to overinflate a position, or so on, which we do not in fact have.

And it's LAUGHABLE you're one to ask me to go after arguments instead of technicalities "for once" when I actually presented arguments and your "rebuttals" to me here have all been on technicalities! "Attack the idea, not technicalities" would carry far more weight if not coming from a person who accused me of moving a goal post when I addressed directly someone ELSE'S argument, who then attacked me for not having a max leveled SAM for a topic (seeing if people disagree in forums or not) that doesn't require having a Job leveled to see.

You aren't arguing in good faith and anything I present to you you're going to ignore or also attack, same as you ignored me giving you the player numbers (you didn't even bother to attack the sources, you just ignored I gave it to you so you could lie about it later bringing it up into different discussions).

I'm still waiting for you to acknowledge that so I'm not wasting my time. Because I'm pretty sure if I give you ANY source you're going to attack it/ignore it anyway. "Well, this one only mentioned Kaiten in passing", "Was this person a SAM main? CLEARLY their opinion doesn't count!", etc etc. Heck, in that thread in General are people saying Kaiten being removed was good and saying why they thought so, and you ignored them. If you're just going to ignore such statements, what's the point in showing them to you?

.

And the messed up thing is: I personally don't care either way and would be fine with them returning Kaiten.

I literally have no figurative horse in this race, but you're attacking me for merely pointing out that some of the complaints against Kaiten removal aren't well founded and that there are people that agreed with its removal.

.

EDIT: My position, as posted there:

This is my position as well.

It IS an obsession, people that want it back ARE irrational in how they will lash out at anyone they perceive as preventing that (even if said person has actual arguments or is offering fair rebuttal to them), but I personally don't care. If it made people happy, give it back to them? As long as it isn't making a bunch of other people upset, what's the harm? No one hurt, lots more happy, win-win/net positive.