Would you like an in-game parser?

[Ghishlain]

Random stat breakdown time (take with a grain of salt as this a small and limited sample size):

Total Votes as of May 16th, 2016 - 1221 EST (thread approximately going for 10 days - can be skewed as posters can vote for multiple options)
Total Vote - 306 Votes
No Parser - 50 Votes (16.34%)
Yes, Group Parser - 156 Votes (50.98%)
Yes, Personal Parser - 100 Votes (32.68%)

No VS Yes, Group Parser
Total Vote - 206 Votes
No Parser - 50 Votes (24.27%)
Yes, Group Parser - 156 Votes (75.73%)


No VS Yes, Personal Parser
Total Vote - 150 Votes
No Parser - 50 Votes (33.33%)
Yes, Personal Parser - 100 Votes (66.67%)

Yes, Group Parser VS Yes, Personal Parser
Total Vote - 256 Votes
Yes, Group Parser - 156 Votes (60.94%)
Yes, Personal Parser - 100 Votes (39.06%)

[LaylaTsarra]

Total Votes arbitrarily assuming 50% of the Personal Parser population voted both Parser options[/B][/U]

You really are pretty desperate aren't you to fudge the numbers. ASSUMING 50 PERCENT VOTED BOTH PARSER OPTIONS? Really.

The vote is as follows:

50 No parser wanted
101 Personal parser only -- the question clearly asked Yes, but I would only like a personal in game parser.
159 group parser

That is approximately 50 percent AGAINST GROUP PARSERS. Stop already trying to fudge the numbers.

[Rawrz]

You really are pretty desperate aren't you to fudge the numbers. ASSUMING 50 PERCENT VOTED BOTH PARSER OPTIONS? Really.

The vote is as follows:

50 No parser wanted
101 Personal parser only -- the question clearly asked Yes, but I would only like a personal in game parser.
159 group parser

That is approximately 50 percent AGAINST GROUP PARSERS. Stop already trying to fudge the numbers.

*kills myself for saying "You can vote more than one"* I WAS ON A FIVE MINUTE BREAK FROM WORK FORGIVE ME Q.Q

[LaylaTsarra]

*kills myself for saying "You can vote more than one"* I WAS ON A FIVE MINUTE BREAK FROM WORK FORGIVE ME Q.Q

Yeah you are killing yourself. What is it about your question that is ambiguous? Yes, but I would ONLY like a personal in game parser.

[Ghishlain]

You really are pretty desperate aren't you to fudge the numbers. ASSUMING 50 PERCENT VOTED BOTH PARSER OPTIONS? Really.

The vote is as follows:

50 No parser wanted
101 Personal parser only -- the question clearly asked Yes, but I would only like a personal in game parser.
159 group parser

That is approximately 50 percent AGAINST GROUP PARSERS. Stop already trying to fudge the numbers.

It's funny how you DID NOT pick up on the fact I made the exact same statistical calculation on my previous data collection given the long chain of comments we had. lol~

You know why I made that statistical analysis? It's because the OP (Rawrz) made note that you can vote for more than one. This implies that some people may like to have both options available - a personal parser or a group parser.

You know what, I'll just ask it straight.

Rawrz, are you okay with posters voting for both a personal parser and a group parser?

If the OP is okay with that, then the context of his poll is clear and you have no ground to stand on with your comment.

If he doesn't want posters to choose multiple options, then I'll gladly remove the analysis from my post. No skin off my back.

With that being said, neither of us have the right to speak on the OPs behalf so it's probably best to just ask for clarity on the point.

I'm not even sure what you think I'm trying to fudge either. I implied at the very beginning of our comment chain back on page 18 that the forum community would like to see a way to measure their DPS. REGARDLESS OF HOW ITS IMPLEMENTED.

Can't you see the fact that approximately 83% of the community current respondents [edit: this sounds better actually] (assuming no voters are voting twice) WANT A TOOL TO GAUGE THEIR DPS?

Whether a group measuring tool or an individual measuring tool should be implemented is still up for debate but AGAIN, THIS DEBATE HAS NO BEARING ON THE CONTEXT OF MY INITIAL POST YOU ARGUED ON.

...do you understand yet? Or you going to continue to cherry pick specific comments in my posts just to suit your own rhetoric? Your move, you can show you're a better person and actually understand what the person you're trying to argue with is saying instead of completely missing the point.

Here's the quote again that sparked our discussion chain just for context:

I continue to be surprised that the "No" vote continues to remain as low as it is despite how many people are seemingly opposed to parsers, though that's probably confirmation bias on my own part too.

Not anywhere in my comment do I mention anything about group parser, I just make a comment about parsing in general. No comment or context here about personal or group measuring devices.

[Thunda_Cat_SMASH]

Random stat breakdown time (take with a grain of salt as this a small and limited sample size):

Just wanted to point out you have no reason to assume that some votes for a personal parser aren't also coming from those that don't want parsers. I voted for no parsers, but I also voted for personal parsers only, and only if it ABSOLUTELY had to happen in some form.

[Ghishlain]

Just wanted to point out you have no reason to assume that some votes for a personal parser aren't also coming from those that don't want parsers. I voted for no parsers, but I also voted for personal parsers only, and only if it ABSOLUTELY had to happen in some form.

This true too. I'll probably update my post on the previous page to reflect this once Rwarz answers since there's no point to do it if that's not his intent xD

*Wonders how many people trolled the poll by voting for all there* /think

[Reinha]

Random stat breakdown time

I would just like to point out that any percentage comparisons related to total votes are completely irrelevant because we can vote on any number of options. The OP says so right in the first post. The total number of votes is not a good thing to compare to, because it does not represent the total number of voters (a sample of the population). A percentage display only matters if it's a percentage of voters and not votes. There is, however, one thing you can do with this data. You can compare how many times more an option was voted for than another option, because we can only vote once on each option.

As of now, it's 53 for no, 163 for personal, 102 for public. There is an unknown amount of people voting multiple options.
(1) Voters support a personal parser 3.08 times as much (208% more) as no parser. Other way around: the number of votes for no parser is 0.33 (33%) compared to the number of votes for a personal parser. (67% less voted for no parser than personal)
(2) Voters support a public parser 1.96 times as much (96% more) as no parser. Other way around: the number of votes for no parser is 0.52 (52%) compared to the number of votes for a public parser. (48% less voted for no parser than public)
(3) Voters support a personal parser 1.60 times as much (60% more) as a public parser. Other way around: the number of votes for a public parser is 0.63 (63%) compared to the number of votes for a personal parser. (37% less voted for public than personal)

I would also like to agree with Thunda_Cat that you have to take into account the possibility that some people vote for no parser and personal parser as valid options, but are opposed to a public parser. You can't just say "the majority wants parsers in any form and we just need to decide which form", because some people would rather have no parser at all than a public parser. As Layla said, the third option is formulated "Yes, but I would only like a personal in game parser", which will have guided the voters to make their choice. It was not a question of "Do you want parsers? Yes/No". There were 3 distinct options. Personally, I ticked the first and the third options precisely because of how the third option was formulated, but do not make the mistake of assuming I am in favor of a public parser. I didn't tick that box and my vote does not count towards that option in any way. Interpreting the votes as such is flawed.

Also, the last 2 number breakdowns are sort of pointless. They are just guesswork. You don't know how many voted for both parser options and you don't know how many voted for one parser option plus the no parser option. You also don't know the number of voters. Arbitrary numbers offer nothing of value and would be better left out of any statistical analysis.