I don't currently have time to read through the thread, so I apologize if this was already brought up.

The problem surrounding the parser is a complicated one. As it stands now, it essentially exists as the most un-enforced rule in the game. It's in the terms of service to not use them, but the director has said (paraphrased) "it's fine, just don't use it to be a dick". This creates the situation we have now, where it's blatantly obvious to those who use a parser who is underperforming, but they can't speak up about it for fear of getting reported for parsing.

As it stands, there's basically three options.
- Crack down on parser use officially
- keep the system as it is
- implement an in-game parser of some kind.

+ Option one represents a reduction of dps-based discrimination entirely, since most people would stop using it, and those who do use it would keep completely quiet about it or get banned. Outweighing this advantage, however, is the negative opinion of players who might quit the game because of this decision and the increased manpower on SE's end to actually police this.
+ Option two represents the least amount of effort on SE's part. In addition, it kinda combines the best of both worlds; players can record and compare their numbers, but there still exists a deterrent against, to use an over-used term, toxicity. As a counter to it, it can be said that toxic players will be toxic regardless of said deterrant and the existence of an internal/external parser wouldn't really change that or SE's rules against it.
+ Option three represents the highest amount of effort in developing and implementing an in-game parser, but once that's complete the "effort input" remains the same as option two, in that SE simply puts passive effort into policing problem players. Another disadvantage is that those who are defined as "poor performers" might become discouraged and quit the game.

The common theme? Both options one and three represent a higher resource allocation and a possibly lower income for the game as a whole. I can see them going with option three with the condition that they become strict with dps-based harassment, but there's still the issue of actually devoting resources to developing the supported parser. In the end, if it happens, it'll be one of the things we get instead of a dungeon during an odd patch. So 4.3 at the earliest.

Just my two cents.