Results 1 to 10 of 11423

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Player
    Bonoki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    697
    Character
    Phoebe Iris
    World
    Balmung
    Main Class
    Dark Knight Lv 60
    Using the term "strike" was undeniably a poor choice, especially since strikes can be frowned upon in certain parts of the world. However, it did succeed in raising awareness, which was its primary goal, and it has ultimately achieved that purpose. Unfortunately, some bad actors are exacerbating the situation, and whataboutism is diverting attention from the main issue. Nonetheless, the strike has highlighted a significant divide within the community about whether Healers are in an acceptable state, indicating that we have reached an impasse.
    (3)
    99.99% chance probably a Titanman alt

  2. #2
    Player
    aiqa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    356
    Character
    Eleasaid Seraqa
    World
    Zodiark
    Main Class
    White Mage Lv 100
    Quote Originally Posted by Bonoki View Post
    Using the term "strike" was undeniably a poor choice, especially since strikes can be frowned upon in certain parts of the world. However, it did succeed in raising awareness, which was its primary goal, and it has ultimately achieved that purpose. Unfortunately, some bad actors are exacerbating the situation, and whataboutism is diverting attention from the main issue. Nonetheless, the strike has highlighted a significant divide within the community about whether Healers are in an acceptable state, indicating that we have reached an impasse.
    It's not an impasse at all. "We" don't have to decide if healers get changed or not. And disagreements were to be expected, design by committee is very difficulty even in a professional setting. The only thing players have do is provide feedback. Either in the form of written feedback, or by making different choices in what job to play, or to play FF at all.

    Getting outraged over the word "strike" is extremely thin skinned. And I've not seen any good faith posts, explaining in a normal tone that they personally object against the word "strike". As far as I know it's a question/assumption for now, made to explain some of the extreme hostility. And considering the numerous other disingenuous objections to the strike I've seen in this thread, even if someone now comes in to personally object to the word "strike", I am not sure if I'd believe that objection is really about the word "strike" or if it's another disingenuous objection.
    (12)