Built-in Parsers

[Dualgunner]

i did say it goes both ways, but i've seen ppl link other peoples fflogs in fights over content, how good jobs are. Or in petty disagreements to showcase "you you suck stop talking"

I've seen the former, done it a few times myself but that isn't using fflogs to harass a person, its displaying data points to back up an argument.

The latter is an argument tactic calling into question the authority and qualifications one has to speak. For instance, it may feel a little disingenuous when X says that DRG is bar none the easiest job ever and he could do it in his sleep, but he only has 5% on the fflogs in his three v1s kills and nothing besides. If it makes you feel better people extend this to levels as well: seen plenty of people calling others out for speaking with supposed authority on a job they haven't leveled.

Its a lot like a college paper come to think of it. If you don't have the credentials to prove you know what you're talking about, you have to cite someone who does.

[Lambdafish]

Its a lot like a college paper come to think of it. If you don't have the credentials to prove you know what you're talking about, you have to cite someone who does.

And this is the reasonable counterargument to someone bringing up FFlogs. You can be well researched in a job without playing it. I personally only have DRK at 61 but I can talk about it because my co-tank is a DRK and I have looked into the strengths and weaknesses of the job, and how it interacts with the party on a raid level. I don't have DRK levelled, I don't know if I could play DRK as effectively as my PLD, but I do know DRK in some shape or form.

This is me citing my sources and circumventing my lack of credentials in a reasonable manner, and making people aware that I know what I am talking about despite proof of the contrary, and it is my responsibility to make that known if called out. Complaining about FFlogs is not a good enough counterargument.