The new Viper changes are great

[Wolf_Heartnet]

The appeal to authority fallacy is when you trust something that someone says STRICTLY because they are an authority even though it's untrue. You clearly don't know anything about the "logical fallacies" you actually cite.

Trying to prove your own expertise based on your own experiences is called "using evidence" and "ethos," which is stuff they teach you in your high school English class.

Sorry you missed those! Must've been too busy progging story or something.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

An argument from authority[a] is a form of argument in which the opinion of an authority figure (or figures) is used as evidence to support an argument.[1]

The argument from authority is a logical fallacy,[2] and obtaining knowledge in this way is fallible.[3][4]

It's not evidence. Ur claiming authority on the subject based on your parse. We can't argue back to you because you claim authority on the area. If you werent the authority then that means we don't have to listen to you based on your parse BECAUSE your not an authority. So you ARE claiming authority.

your parse is not reflective of the arguments or conversations thats happening here. You're using parse to say that my opinion on the changes being good is invalid because of my lack of having a leveled character and calling me a rage baiter. When proven wrong, you switched to parse and using that to make you an authority on the argument. You "evidence" is completely irrelevant because it doesnt do anything to disprove what I said. In fact, you have been wrong on several counts on this thread.

Argue with words and logic rather than relying on a parse to dismiss any topic just because you don't like other peoples opinions.

[W00by]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority


It's not evidence. Ur claiming authority on the subject based on your parse. We can't argue back to you because you claim authority on the area. If you werent the authority then that means we don't have to listen to you based on your parse BECAUSE your not an authority. So you ARE claiming authority.

your parse is not reflective of the arguments or conversations thats happening here. You're using parse to say that my opinion on the changes being good is invalid because of my lack of having a leveled character and calling me a rage baiter. When proven wrong, you switched to parse and using that to make you an authority on the argument. You "evidence" is completely irrelevant because it doesnt do anything to disprove what I said. In fact, you have been wrong on several counts on this thread.

Argue with words and logic rather than relying on a parse to dismiss any topic just because you don't like other peoples opinions.

But I'm not an "authority" figure, in this case. I'm proving I'm a credible expert. I'm NOT saying "I made Viper so listen to me," I'm proving that I'm knowledgeable on a subject I intend to discuss. By your incorrect interpretation of the fallacy, you're saying that the professional opinions of scientists and doctors mean less than a layman who's talking about the same thing, because doctors and scientists aren't allowed to use their expertise to argue, otherwise "meh, it doesn't mean anything 'cus they're an authority figure!"

I am not using the opinion of an authority figure (notably, an external one) as my only argument. I'm using the opinion of myself, which I prove as credible via my own expertise and have numerical data supporting that expertise. Your interpretation of the fallacy is still wrong. And it was still wrong after you went to Wikipedia and proved yourself wrong?... That's impressive.

[Eudyptes]

Logs are a good metric of game understanding. It's proof that you cleared something, and understood your job while you did. Other people are logging you, regardless of whether or not you're logging yourself, and it's proof (or a lack thereof) that you know what you're talking about. If you can't demonstrate that you're clearing content where things like Job design and balance matters, people will justifiably take issue with that.

You are correct that it is proof of completion, but the buck stops there. Anyone with high school level knowledge of statistics would know that data w/o context means nothing. It's insane to try to argue that less than 20% of my actual kills on a mob in an uncontrolled environment accurately reflects reality. Esp since most of the time I'm "tryharding" is in my static.

Also, that PF argument isn't the argument you think it is. You're using your complete data against incomplete data. In the few fights I did numerous times with pugs (alliance raids) in EW I had orange parses during the tier I was actively doing them (content I wasn't even taking 100% seriously either. mind you). Which, again, is data I did not even upload so it isn't complete. However, it does prove I can hit those numbers. This discredits any attempts at using incomplete information against me.

So yeah, your whole argument/attempt to discredit here is flawed right out of the gate tbh.

[W00by]

You are correct that it is proof of completion, but the buck stops there. Anyone with high school level knowledge of statistics would know that data w/o context means nothing. It's insane to try to argue that less than 20% of my actual kills on a mob in an uncontrolled environment accurately reflects reality. Esp since most of the time I'm "tryharding" is in my static.

Also, that PF argument isn't the argument you think it is. You're using your complete data against incomplete data. In the few fights I did numerous times with pugs (alliance raids) in EW I had orange parses during the tier I was actively doing them (content I wasn't even taking 100% seriously either. mind you). Which, again, is data I did not even upload so it isn't complete. However, it does prove I can hit those numbers. This discredits any attempts at using incomplete information against me.

So yeah, your whole argument/attempt to discredit here is flawed right out of the gate tbh.

Either way, you have no proof that you have completed it, or that you are knowledgeable on your job. Evidence that you were bad would be really damning, but an absence of evidence is still not stronger than evidence. You could be the best Viper player in the world, but if no one can see that, then no one knows to trust you either way.

In contrast, the complete data of other players demonstrating their expertise is far stronger than "uhhh, you don't know if I'm good or not 'cus you can't see my logs!" Like, yeah, I don't know if you're good or not, so I'm well within my rights to assume you aren't if your argument is ridiculous and there's no data to support that you know what you're talking about.

If you don't want people judging you on your logs, you should start logging yourself. (Alliance Raid logs are also really poor evidence of player skill since so many people are completing them that the data is skewed, and the floor is soooo much lower than in savage. They're still super poor evidence of skill, but I digress.)

[Wolf_Heartnet]

But I'm not an "authority" figure, in this case. I'm proving I'm a credible expert. I'm NOT saying "I made Viper so listen to me," I'm proving that I'm knowledgeable on a subject I intend to discuss. By your incorrect interpretation of the fallacy, you're saying that the professional opinions of scientists and doctors mean less than a layman who's talking about the same thing, because doctors and scientists aren't allowed to use their expertise to argue, otherwise "meh, it doesn't mean anything 'cus they're an authority figure!"

I am not using the opinion of an authority figure. Your interpretation of the fallacy is still wrong. And it was still wrong after you went to Wikipedia and proved yourself wrong?... That's impressive.

Incorrect. The difference is that your not talking based on actual constructive information and feedback or analysis. A Doctor doesnt have to use his job title in order to prove his point. A doctor can have a conversation with a layman and explain why a medicine may be good or bad for you and the layman can read studies and educate himself and retort with the doctors with his own knowledge. The doctors title and the laymans background has nothing to do with the actual exchange of information based on the topic. All they have to do is argue facts. Take the pandemic that happened, right? It was filled with false information and many doctors (including fauci) was wrong. Despite alot of people arguing early on that it wouldnt work and it was many laymen that pointed this out.

What you're doing is saying "Im a doctor. Shut up. You're not a doctor. You're wrong. Shut up"

It seems like you're having alot of trouble understanding the fallacy or just willfully ignorant. I believe its the ladder.

[W00by]

ladder.

Ignore the quote. It's just kind of funny. (And Fauci comment? Are we getting political on here? That's epic.)

At any rate, you're still super off here. I don't think my logs make me an authority over you -- I don't think I'm your boss, I think you're bad at the game, and that the opinions of players that don't understand the game fundamentally can't offer valuable design insights because they don't know what they're talking about. I'm not telling you "shut up I have good logs." I'm telling you that you DON'T have good logs, which demonstrates a LACK OF EXPERTISE when it comes to the DESIGN of Viper, which is important in a conversation about the DESIGN of Viper. You can cling to the logical fallacy all you want, but that doesn't make it any less true. If I wanted to push up my glasses and get real rhetorical, I'd say you're attacking the strawman argument of this "appeal to authority" thing rather than debunking the actual claims I'm making, but that'd be really cringe so I won't do that.

I haven't been talking about whether or not the Viper changes are good. if you want to see my opinion on the Viper conversation, you should read my post history! I've made lots of evidence and design based arguments against the changes, and my logs are evidence that I know what I'm talking about on that particular subject.

I just didn't post them here, because any time anyone disagrees with you, you call them a toxic elitist. (It's kinda cringe.)

[Eudyptes]

Either way, you have no proof that you have completed it, or that you are knowledgeable on your job. Evidence that you were bad would be really damning, but an absence of evidence is still not stronger than evidence. You could be the best Viper player in the world, but if no one can see that, then no one knows to trust you either way.

In contrast, the complete data of other players demonstrating their expertise is far stronger than "uhhh, you don't know if I'm good or not 'cus you can't see my logs!" Like, yeah, I don't know if you're good or not, so I'm well within my rights to assume you aren't if your argument is ridiculous and there's no data to support that you know what you're talking about.

If you don't want people judging you on your logs, you should start logging yourself. (Alliance Raid logs are also really poor evidence of player skill since so many people are completing them that the data is skewed, and the floor is soooo much lower than in savage. They're still super poor evidence of skill, but I digress.)

Sorry but I'm not breaking ToS to win an internet fight.

[Wolf_Heartnet]

Sorry but I'm not breaking ToS to win an internet fight.

Good on you!
Take my Like!

[W00by]

Sorry but I'm not breaking ToS to win an internet fight.

You can hide behind the Terms of Service all you like, but it doesn't make any of what I've said less true.

Also, for what it's worth, I'd take any non-ToS breaking evidence that you're good too! Perhaps if you can post a video of you playing on YouTube, or link your achievements in game showing you've cleared Ultimate fights (though we still won't know what job you played it on). That evidence is just a lot weaker since no one can prove you didn't buy the clear/what job you did it on/how well you did it, but it's still evidence. But if you don't have any evidence of skill people just won't take you as seriously.

[Eudyptes]

You can hide behind the Terms of Service all you like, but it doesn't make any of what I've said less true.

Also, for what it's worth, I'd take any non-ToS breaking evidence that you're good too! Perhaps if you can post a video of you playing on YouTube, or link your achievements in game showing you've cleared Ultimate fights (though we still won't know what job you played it on). That evidence is just a lot weaker since no one can prove you didn't buy the clear/what job you did it on/how well you did it, but it's still evidence. But if you don't have any evidence of skill people just won't take you as seriously.

Everything you said was proven untrue in my first post. You can't prove something via lack of evidence. Like that's just not how it works.

That said, I do have proof through your own methods. you just can't cherrypick the bad while ignoring the good.