Would you like an in-game parser?

[Ghishlain]

*Screams internally* You are still including percentages which are based on the total number of votes and not voters (a sample of the population we are studying). To give you an idea of how badly it allows you to misinterpret the data, I give you a scenario where 61 people voted all 3 as good options and 55 voted for exactly 2 options. A total of 180 voters. Woosh, we get 33.89% no parser, 100% yes (group) parser and 64.44% personal parser. The percentages nearly doubled. How about a scenario where 116 people voted for both parser options, and everyone else picked one option? A total of 241 voters. Now we get 25.31% no parser, 74.69% (group) parser, 48.13% personal parser. "Can be skewed" does not quite cover how utterly wrong your percentages could be. Some people have already announced that they voted for more than 1 option, so we know for a fact it's skewed.

As I said earlier, you should be comparing the options to each other, not to the total number of votes.
180 / 61 = 2.95: The voters want a (group) parser 2.95 times as much as no parser.
180 / 116 = 1.55: The voters want a (group) parser 1.55 times as much as just a personal parser.
116 / 61 = 1.90: The voters want a personal parser 1.90 times as much as no parser.

This method of analysis will not fail regardless of how many options each person voted for. I can do the same calculations with your hypothetical scenario, where everyone only voted once and the total number of votes represents the total number of voters. I can also do the calculations with my own scenarios where the number of voters is much lower. The ratio between the options is always the same, because it is information that does not contain unknown variables.

Your scenario:
50.42% / 17.09% = 2.95
50.42% / 32.49% = 1.55
32.49% / 17.09% = 1.90

My scenarios:
100% / 33.89% = 2.95
100% / 64.44% = 1.55
64.44% / 33.89% = 1.90

74.69% / 25.31% = 2.95
74.69% / 48.13% = 1.55
48.13% / 25.31% = 1.90

Sorry if it seems like I'm nitpicking. I'm a fiend for numbers and this really rustles my jimmies. Just trying to make your random stat breakdowns a little less... random. Misinterpreting data helps no one and there have already been people referencing your posts in their flawed conclusions. (I recall someone summing up that half the population wants public parsers. No, half the population does not necessarily want a group parser. I just showed above that it could be as high as 100%.)

It's okay, I'm a fiend with numbers too and don't mind being told otherwise, lol since I don't really want to skew facts badly either. I honestly wish there was more people like you to fact check me because I like seeing the different avenues numbers can be approached at and ensuring accurate information is on the table. I dislike misinformation and if I'm a cause of that I'd be irked at myself too.

Back on the topic of statistics, I can see where you're coming from regarding the percentage and I think I finally comprehend what you mean on the previous post. It's a shame there's no way to tell how many posters doubled (or tripled if they wanted to troll) up because it makes it difficult to analysis the data effectively.

I do believe it's important to show the data over a period of time just to see how the data is trending, though I also do so because I'm curious about keeping a record of what's going on for myself and others to interpret. In an effort to reduce skewed discussions, would you prefer the data be presented in a format as shown below?:

Random stat breakdown (take with a grain of salt as due sample size and limiting respondents to only the official forum community):

Total Votes as of May 23rd, 2016 - 1242 EST (thread approximately going for 17 days - can be skewed as posters due note that posters can vote for multiple options)
Total Vote - 357 Votes (+51 respondents total votes)
No Parser - 61 Votes (17.09%)
Yes, Group Parser - 180 Votes (50.42%)
Yes, Personal Parser - 116 Votes (32.49%)

Previous Tally from a week ago

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 - 241 Votes
No Parser - 61 Votes (25.31%)
Yes, Group Parser - 180 Votes (74.69%)


No VS Yes, Personal Parser
Total Vote - 177 Votes
No Parser - 61 Votes (34.46%)
Yes, Personal Parser - 116 Votes (65.54%)


Yes, Group Parser VS Yes, Personal Parser
Total Vote - 296 Votes
Yes, Group Parser - 180 Votes (60.81%)
Yes, Personal Parser - 116 Votes (39.19%)

What sucks is that without knowing who's voted for which, we really can't analysis beyond the information that you (rightfully) mentioned. I don't even really want to add the ratios you mentioned either because I feel the context isn't clear either. What group of people voted for both Group and Personal Parser? That would change the "ratio" of players in each category if there's a "Both" option. I understand that in your context you're just looking at the raw numbers - the votes without thinking about what may happen if they double up but even that can be mishandled in a specific way too.

Ah well.

If S-E were to do say a login census of the player base, I almost hope they do these options:

"Would you like to see the implementation of a DPS measuring tool within FFXIV?"

1. No, I would not like a DPS measuring tool.
2. Yes, I would like a way to gauge my personal DPS only.
3. Yes, I would like a way to gauge my own and my group's DPS.
4. Yes, I would like a way to gauge my DPS (doesn't matter if personal or group).
5. I do not care about damage meters.

I'm not sure if there's any other options - I think that covers most of the potential answers though I'm not sure how I could word an option to be "I'm opposed to a parser, but if one were to be implemented I would only want it to be for personal use" since I imagine the option for "No parser, but if we have to include make it go all out". Actually, upon typing that you'd probably just want to add a second question to it too for the "No Parser" crowd though that almost feels slightly redundant too. Like, ask the question "If we are going to implement a parser, which would you prefer?" with options (1) Personal; (2) Group; (3) I remain highly against a parser and abstain from voting.

Well, just some food for thought for S-E if they're reading this and anyone else wants to help refine it too~