Tank dps harrasment

[jameseoakes]

Lastly, there's nothing in the ToS against checking players' logs and including or excluding them from groups because of that. It's done all the time, even as written in party finder descriptions, and there is nothing that has or will be done against it, since checking someone's logs doesn't even mean you're using a parser. All it means is you're browsing a website. That's like saying you're reporting people for saying they've checked your Lodestone profile. (Of course harassment based on someone's logs is and should be a reportable offense, but simply pointing out that your public records for a particular fight are too low for a group's requirements is not harassment.)

Aren't those logs being made using data that should not be obtainable without people breaking the ToS. I'm starting to wonder if the harassment from people abusing FFlogs maybe something FFLogs or SE themselves will need to look into.

[Avatre]

Aren't those logs being made using data that should not be obtainable without people breaking the ToS. I'm starting to wonder if the harassment from people abusing FFlogs maybe something FFLogs or SE themselves will need to look into.

It's more of a grey area than anything else. They don't care if you use it, as long as there is zero harassment going on because of it. BUT, that doesn't exactly mean you can use it openly as there are some people that even the mentioning of a parser will send them reporting to the GMs(I remember seeing a post somewhere on the forums where someone stated they did that if someone said they use a parser).

[Oscura]

Aren't those logs being made using data that should not be obtainable without people breaking the ToS. I'm starting to wonder if the harassment from people abusing FFlogs maybe something FFLogs or SE themselves will need to look into.

Everything from the parsers and FFlogs is being pulled directly from the battle log in game. The one you can read. It just makes it even easier to read.

[Taika]

Aren't those logs being made using data that should not be obtainable without people breaking the ToS. I'm starting to wonder if the harassment from people abusing FFlogs maybe something FFLogs or SE themselves will need to look into.

They're based on parsing which is against ToS, yes (although the developers openly turn a blind eye to it).
(Edit: I don't know if it would be possible to have a similar site but upgrade direct game log data instead of taking it through a parser. But yeah, as already pointed out, the parser basically just reads your game battle log.) But having your logs up there does not mean you have been parsing, it just means someone in your group has. During the discussion in the latest parser thread, I checked there were over 110 000 public group parses just for OS1, so there are almost 900 000 player parses just for that fight (of course there are generally multiple parses for one player). If SE was to ban all the people who they'd find there, well, you can imagine what that would do to the playerbase (in fact, they would ban you).

You really need to separate harassment from stating numbers though, those are two very different things.

[jameseoakes]

They're based on parsing which is against ToS, yes (although the developers openly turn a blind eye to it).
(Edit: I don't know if it would be possible to have a similar site but upgrade direct game log data instead of taking it through a parser. But yeah, as already pointed out, the parser basically just reads your game battle log.) But having your logs up there does not mean you have been parsing, it just means someone in your group has. During the discussion in the latest parser thread, I checked there were over 110 000 public group parses just for OS1, so there are almost 900 000 player parses just for that fight (of course there are generally multiple parses for one player). If SE was to ban all the people who they'd find there, well, you can imagine what that would do to the playerbase (in fact, they would ban you).

You really need to separate harassment from stating numbers though, those are two very different things.

I know you don't need personally parse to have data FFlogs but the fact that data is uploaded and displayed without the consent of the players is worrying given the trend to abuse the data offered by the site.

I also didn't mean to imply that people that have data on FFlogs should be banned (as that would be almost everyone who's been in savage). FFlogs should have a consent in system though.
Also I feel this is getting a tad off topic

[Taika]

the fact that data is uploaded and displayed without the consent of the players is worrying given the trend to abuse the data offered by the site.

Where is this "trend to abuse the data"? What do you mean by that? I have done a lot of Savage and extreme pugging in SB, and I have only once in that entire time seen a person being excluded from a group because of their numbers. It was OS4 first clear party, the person was a DD, and the group could not have beaten the fight with that person. Cases like this are not "abuse", they are using objective data to make informed decisions - in this case one that prevented one person from ruining the group. Having high DPS farm groups where low rank players aren't allowed also isn't abuse - it's about being open about your expectations and allowing similar minded and skilled people to play together at their own level.

Sure the OP has told how they were kicked from a DF dungeon because of DPS, but I'm pretty sure that doesn't count as a "trend" either, since everyone here seems to 100% agree with it being completely ridiculous.

Edit: As far as I know, I think you're allowed to hide your own data from FFlogs too. I understand it's not the same than asking your permission to show it in the first place, but at least it's there.

[CaTi]

Lastly, there's nothing in the ToS against checking players' logs and including or excluding them from groups because of that. It's done all the time, even as written in party finder descriptions, and there is nothing that has been or will be done against it, since checking someone's logs doesn't even mean you're using a parser. All it means is you're browsing a website. That's like saying you're reporting people for saying they've checked your Lodestone profile. (Of course harassment based on someone's logs is and should be a reportable offense, but simply pointing out that your public records for a particular fight are too low for a group's requirements is not harassment.)

Well technically you're right the ToS violation is actually the physical act of having a parser so referencing FFlogs wouldn't actually be a violation. Technically. It is still data that a player should not have access to though and I certainly wouldn't imagine using that as grounds for exclusion (even in a polite, non-harassment manner) would get you very far if you got reported and had actually mentioned it in game.

[Taika]

It is still data that a player should not have access to though

What, I'm not allowed to calculate my and my party members' DPS from my battle log and post it on a site where everyone else does the same?

[CaTi]

What, I'm not allowed to calculate my and my part members' DPS from my battle log and post it on a site where everyone else does the same?

Heh Touché, you're quick I'll give you that.

Take a thumbs up

[Eclair_Xysha]

Tbh... I really don't give a rats butt as long as you keep agro in casual/semi casual contents.

The moment you screw up mechanics or lose agro, then I'll speak up, but I won't kick you before giving you chances...