Would you like an in-game parser?

[Ghishlain]

Actually, 1.0 and XI communities were not like that. But maybe it's because they were united against a common enemy...the game itself

What a parser would make is certainly not improve the community, and, probably make it worse.

But, as I said, allow each player to chose. Make an option to hide or show your damage for parsers.

It's funny you should mention these games as games that didn't really user parsers. While I didn't play 1.0 at all so I can't speak to it, but it would make a lot sense for a game that didn't rely heavily on hard enrages and DPS checks to not require the use of an ingame parser. The only monster I can think of in XI that had some sort of timer in the 75 era was PW (and even that monster didn't have a timer until a LS tried to fight it for SIXTEEN hours straight)

Probably not the best example of a game that didn't really need to use a parser.

For your third line, I will say if a personal parser is considered, that parser should never have the ability to be revealed. It's there to measure yourself and that's it - no one else needs to know that number.

And suddenly, those people won't be able to hide under their false "By using a parser themselves, they'll be able do measure the size of their own...progress"

I would probably refrain from making generalized statements like these. They do nothing more than undermine both your character and your argument by attempting to paint the other side under a very general paintbrush of "abusive" players.

This is equal to anyone claiming that you don't want a parser in game because you just want to be a lazy DPS and watch netflix all day while jamming auto attack into the boss and/or monsters.

It's an incorrect generalization and not conducive to actual discussion. And yes, this comment applies to both sides of the argument in this thread.

Oh, shoot, I forgot to vote on the poll...so, 1 voice for no parser, over 307 total votes...Yeah, my pitiful vote, who would change absolutely nothing on the end results, would actually count thirty times more on this poll than the poll itself on the whole community...
Sure...a vaaaast majority...

I should really look up Statistical Significance again and see if we have a significant sample size. You hear political polls where they polled 1,406 respondents and it apparently this is significant to them. Considering, in this particular context of my link, the Canadian population is 35.16m if about 33% of the population is considered active voters (11.60m); 1,406 respondents only represents 0.0121% of that population.

300 out of 400,000 is still more significant than that (0.075%). >>; [Editted due to another post]

Are there any statistician majors in the house? lol Would like an expert opinion xD

[EDIT]

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.

I can accept this. I will remove that the last two calculations as they were just an attempt to try to show what the percentage would be but that is indeed right in the sense that it is guesswork at best.

I've modified my comment that's in the same post as this towards Reynhart as well just to reflect that "300 responses doesn't necessarily mean 300 individual posters" as that is true too.

[EDIT2] I'll also update that particular post to be the "personal vs group" breakdown as well since it only seems fair.

[EDIT3] Also would like to point out quickly here that even though we don't quite know how many pollers voted for multiple options, the number of "no" votes, even if you consider many "no" voters also voting for "personal", is still overshadowed by those who would like to see a parser (but perhaps not to the 80+% I mentioned earlier in the thread).