The Real Problem with Parsers

[Aiselia]

If their stance is irrelevant, why use it in the first place. Or is it only relevant if it supports your argument?

Because they were two different arguments. One argument was from the perceived SE position, and one is from my own. Whatever SE thinks about parsers doesn't change the fact that I agree they're useful. You're spending an awfully long time fighting with someone who wants them in the game too (provided people don't abuse them). In fact, if SE really doesn't hold the fear that jerks will use it to be jerkier, that's better for me.

So, given that almost anything put in the game can be abused, should they stop adding things?

Not surprisingly, this has already been covered ad nauseam.

Nobody won victories for being able to carry a gun by saying "Well, I could just stab someone with my pen, so what are you going to do, ban pens?" Nobody won victories for drug legalization by saying "Well, I could just overdose on Tylenol, what are you going to do, ban Tylenol?" So why do people think that they'll win victories for parsers by saying "Well, I could just harass someone for wearing purple clothes, are you going to ban purple dyes?"

Also does the parser actually create jerks? Or are the people already jerks, abusing something in game.

Depends on the person.

If you can write a program that actually changes people into jerks from nice people, that is a powerful program.

Most people call them "internet browsers".

[Lyrica_Ashtine]

Well, here's one thing that's a problem, Aiselia.

You're saying you're pro-parser, but most of your posts involves how it shouldn't be in the game. Don't you believe that's even the slightest contradictionary?

[Aiselia]

Well, here's one thing that's a problem, Aiselia.

You're saying you're pro-parser, but most of your posts involves how it shouldn't be in the game. Don't you believe that's even the slightest contradictionary?

I'm pro-parser. I'm anti-jerk.

I'm not saying they shouldn't be in the game, period. I'm saying they shouldn't be in the game if people aren't mature enough to handle them.

So no, it's not contradictory if you consider my entire stance rather than condensing it into the black and white "pro-" and "anti-" crowd.

Your whole stance is that it will be abused by jerks.

You should stop trying to tell me what my stance is. At no time have you ever come close to being accurate as to what my stance is.

And hey, unsurprisingly, I went over THIS too, with a several-post back and forth about scale of effect being important, as well as expectations from the contrary. Sure, not being able to kick during loot rolls could be abused by people wanting to AFK. But being able to kick during loot rolls can be abused by people who don't want to risk someone else winning "their" loot. So which is expected to be the bigger problem? The one where someone who was helping with a fight gets cheated out of a reward, or the one where someone who isn't helping with fights get carried? But let's face it, if you're still getting through the fights without that person that's AFKing, you don't need them, and if you're not, well, kick them after the wipe, because the loot will have likely run out of time by then.

[CGMidlander]

I'm pro-parser. I'm anti-jerk.

I'm not saying they shouldn't be in the game, period. I'm saying they shouldn't be in the game if people aren't mature enough to handle them.

Lmao
Do you even internet?

[Whiteroom]

I'm pro-parser. I'm anti-jerk.

I'm not saying they shouldn't be in the game, period. I'm saying they shouldn't be in the game if people aren't mature enough to handle them.

So no, it's not contradictory if you consider my entire stance rather than condensing it into the black and white "pro-" and "anti-"

Which given the number of players in game, is a fairly black and white comment in itself... everything will cause greifing in the game, you just have to weigh what is an acceptable amount compared the the benefits the addition brings. The whole thing holding up anyone from taking your point too seriously is that you refuse to give even a vague indication of what that acceptable amount is.

[Aiselia]

The whole thing holding up anyone from taking your point too seriously is that you refuse to give even a vague indication of what that acceptable amount is.

No, I'm pretty sure the whole thing holding up anyone from taking my point too seriously is that they refuse to actually read what my points are, and then lump me in with their perceived notion of the anti-parser crowd. What I think is an acceptable amount of harassment is irrelevant because that amount is subjective.

But if you insist, it's zero. No amount of harassment is or should be acceptable. If you just accept it happening because "people can be jerks", you're part of the problem.

First they came for the low DPS, and I did not speak out because I did not have low DPS.
Then they came for the sub-optimally geared, and I did not speak out, because I used BiS.
Then they came for the non-potion-drinkers, and I did not speak out, because I used HQ Draconians.
Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me.

However, since I've already stated (repeatedly) that personal parsers give all the objective benefits of a party parser while still avoiding people being able to harass others over their DPS because they still shouldn't be able to see it as well as sidestepping potential objective detriments that a party-parser would bring (PS3 limits, for example), and still nobody has managed to state an objective benefit of having a party parser over a personal parser, what I think is or isn't acceptable is irrelevant, because I don't support having party parsers as much as I support having personal parsers with optional sharing.

Exactly who are you to judge whether the community is mature enough?

I'm someone who can read this thread and notices the people who aren't even acting mature in discussions ABOUT parsers, not even USING them. It's hard to consider the community to be mature enough when people start insulting others over their low DPS without even having grouped with them.

If the community isn't going to be a jerk to you about it, why would it bother you?

Because I'm not egocentric enough to think that because something won't affect me, it's okay to ignore it, I guess.

[Malevicton]

First they came for the low DPS, and I did not speak out because I did not have low DPS.
Then they came for the sub-optimally geared, and I did not speak out, because I used BiS.
Then they came for the non-potion-drinkers, and I did not speak out, because I used HQ Draconians.
Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me.

Did you seriously just do this? C'mon dude...

Anyways, I'll give an actual comment towards personal parsers since that's not a bad point, and is commonly brought up. While I'd appreciate them in the abstract, it's just no longer practical. I'd be 100% on board if they had been available at launch, but if people really want to see your numbers, they can see them. Hiding your dps is just no longer an option. While it might have been a good option, it's just no do-able anymore.

[Aiselia]

I'd be 100% on board if they had been available at launch, but if people really want to see your numbers, they can see them. Hiding your dps is just no longer an option. While it might have been a good option, it's just no do-able anymore.

However, a personal parser allows for one to be able to see their own output but allows SE to maintain their (actual) current stance that they know people use them but shouldn't bring them up.

But you're right. Hiding your DPS isn't an option if someone already has a parser.

So then, why are party parsers needed? A personal parser gives you information about yourself and presumably will use less resources than a full party one, making it easier to fit in for PS3 players. What more relevant information will a party parser give you that a personal one won't?

Or are you going to argue like you have countless times before that a perfectly good analogy has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

No, I'm going to argue like I have countless times that scale of potential abuse is important. The objective benefits of making a premade outweigh the detriments.

Other people can't help you if they can't tell what you are doing wrong, and some people are unwilling to help themselves.

Continue to the end of what you quoted where I mentioned optional sharing. This can either be done through my idea of having a share button that shares the parse of the last fight (because presumably you'd bring it up after a wipe or when you notice things dying slowly) to a single person or the party depending on your choice, or what someone else brought up of having options of whether you make it public, private, or just plain off.

So, again, what objective benefits are there to a party parser over a personal one with optional sharing?

[Gorlioliolio]

If you are pro-parser can you just accept the fact that people will be jerks regardless?

There are people in this game that on purpose make 7/8 or 23/24 man groups just to mess with the 1 person that isn't in their FC. While these people should be suspended or banned or whatever should the developers stop allowing pre-made groups because there is the potential for this kind of abuse? Even though the vast majority of 7/8 pre-mades are just because they couldn't find a last person and said screw it let's just DF someone?

Or are you going to argue like you have countless times before that a perfectly good analogy has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

I will pre-emptively show the similarities for you

Devs make tool, small amount of people are a-holes with tool. Devs ban a-holes. Tool helps everyone else.

Replace tool with either parsers or DF you get the same result.

state an objective benefit of having a party parser over a personal parser

Other people can't help you if they can't tell what you are doing wrong, and some people are unwilling to help themselves.

[Malevicton]

Well, here's one thing that's a problem, Aiselia.

You're saying you're pro-parser, but most of your posts involves how it shouldn't be in the game. Don't you believe that's even the slightest contradictionary?

no y'see, he's just saying that it shouldn't be implemented in a way that's bad. Which is totally not vague. And while there's no dev quote supporting anything he's said, they still might support it if asked; we can't prove that they wouldn't.

Oh and he's taking the wild position of being a jerk is a bad thing. Except that's not really his stance, he never explicitly said that, go find in his posts where he said that, he's explained his stance so many times we just don't get it, STOP MISCHARACTERIZING HIS NON-VAGUE ARGUMENTS.