Would you like an in-game parser?

[Zojha]

Again, just because there's always going to be inequality doesn't mean you don't try to close the gap. You seem to ignore that point.

Do I? Nowhere do I claim you should not close the gap, nor do I even discourage it. Truly, I am going on in great detail how to close the gap that exists effectively and in a lasting manner. In case you missed it, again and brief this time: If you truly want to close the gap, enforce the rules already in place. Full stop. This makes the implementation of any third party program on terms of equality redundant because equality already exists under these circumstances. Full stop.

I have addressed that point before you even made it. Then, I addressed it again. And yet you claim I ignore it. I'm honestly not sure why you comment on a condescending tone in my post(s) when you apparently don't even read them anyway. But have fun pushing your agenda!

[Kezy_Kaatapoh]

Do I? Nowhere do I claim you should not close the gap, nor do I even discourage it. Truly, I am going on in great detail how to close the gap that exists effectively and in a lasting manner. In case you missed it, again and brief this time: If you truly want to close the gap, enforce the rules already in place. Full stop. This makes the implementation of any third party program on terms of equality redundant because equality already exists under these circumstances. Full stop.

I have addressed that point before you even made it. Then, I addressed it again. And yet you claim I ignore it. I'm honestly not sure why you comment on a condescending tone in my post(s) when you apparently don't even read them anyway. But have fun pushing your agenda!

I have read your posts. You've been encouraging closing the gap through removal of features, which is obviously not the path anyone wants. I shouldn't have to state that closing the gap in that fashion isn't good for the game and that adding features to systems that don't have them is the way to go.

Your point was made rhetorically, making it a null point, while you keep saying that we shouldn't add features to one because we can never have them all. So no, you didn't make that point and you keep failing to acknowledge the only truly reasonable solution to it. I'm not pushing an agenda, it would seem you are.