Things to think about before you call someone "Bad"

[gamepob]

How many times do you, experienced raiders, who can tell who is performing up to your expectations and who's not, praise or congratulate a player for a job well done? Someone who you see is new to the content but did good? And I don't mean "good tanking" or "good healing" at the end, but personal, direct praise to a certain player?
I am guessing all the time.

[supaiku]

The standard in raids should be that people are able to perform at a certain level, a level where they are at least able to perform their rotation and know mechanics unless they are new. Mistakes happen, especially if the content is new, that's not the problem. But if I raid and use pf and get a Bard that doesn't use songs even after I politely advise him to do so, then something is going wrong. Right now the standard is, people can play as bad as they want because we don't pay their sub. And I couldn't care less how these people play in dungeons etc. But the moment someone joins a fight with an enrage timer they should at least try their best and not start crying if someone calls them bad, that isn't an insult, its the truth. But I agree that giving advice should be given in a somewhat friendly way.

[Gallus]

There you go again, shifting the goalposts again. First assessment, then "honest assessment," now "accurate assessment." We also had this issue with the modifier "formative" for the term "formative assessment."

You know if a word needs a modifier, then that means the word does not naturally mean what it means with said modifier? Saying somebody is bad at the game is an assessment. It's not a formative one. One could argue it's a summative assessment. However it does not need to be a formative assessment to be an accurate assessment, an honest assessment, or an assessment.

Yeah let's keep endlessly arguing over the semantics over and over again, because that's what you do in the 50% of the content of your posts. Brings nothing, so I've completely ignored that half of the content of yours in every single post. But you keep insisting, so let's get into it.
The word honest does not change the meaning of assessment whatsoever, so I'm not sure why you are even bringing it up. Your google definition of assessment brings absolutely nothing because the context in which a person offers "friendly" advice to somebody else in an online context has again nothing to do with giving someone a mark in an exam, though judging by your posts you are going to probably try and squeeze some common point here you'll even struggle to believe yourself.

And lastly, people in this thread have repeteadly demonstrated their desire for underperformers to improve, so they can have smoother runs. I'm inclined to believe it is implied that one of the goals of their "feedback", "friendly advice" or whatever you want to call it is to make others improve, which is more in line with the idea of assessment I gave, because know what? If it's not, and these people are really trying to just give a mark and leave it at that, without caring about others improve, I'll have a hard time understanding why I'm even reading the words "friendly advice" over and over again from them.

[Gallus]

Please explain how a tank typing "heals???" in chat is, in any way whatsoever, harassment? They have no idea whether it were simply a brain lapse on your part or you have no idea what you're doing. All they do is they died. Let's assume they popped CDs, so it was a healing error. While them making a comment may across blunt, it's hardly harassment.

It comes off as hostile though. The 90 question marks are not needed. You are already setting the grounds for bad things to happen in that run. If for whatever reason, the healer makes another mistake, what are you going to do, add 1 question mark to your already 90? Most likely a recrimination or two are going to slip, and from there it all goes downhill. The underperformer won't learn a thing, and the only thing you'll manage for them to obtain in that run is a bitter experience.

[Dualgunner]

Yeah let's keep endlessly arguing over the semantics over and over again, because that's what you do in the 50% of the content of your posts. Brings nothing, so I've completely ignored that half of the content of yours in every single post. But you keep insisting, so let's get into it.

And here I've been taking into account the entirety of your posts. I'm hurt.

The word honest does not change the meaning of assessment whatsoever, so I'm not sure why you are even bringing it up.

Assessments can be made in bad faith, or dishonestly. If "honest" really doesn't change the meaning of "assessment"...why add it? To fluff up your post to meet the minimum word requirement? Also how about "accurate"? Does "accurate" now not modify "assessment" at all?

Your google definition of assessment brings absolutely nothing because the context in which a person offers "friendly" advice to somebody else in an online context has again nothing to do with giving someone a mark in an exam, though judging by your posts you are going to probably try and squeeze some common point here you'll even struggle to believe yourself.

Bad isn't an assessment of skill.

You made the claim that the term "bad" is not an assessment of skill. I corrected you. It is not a formative assessment of skill, however it is still assessing that player's skill as bad.

And lastly, people in this thread have repeteadly demonstrated their desire for underperformers to improve, so they can have smoother runs.

I assume people who want to help people improve wouldn't use the term "bad" right out the gate. This doesn't change that "bad" is, at the end of the day, an assessment of skill.

I'm inclined to believe it is implied that one of the goals of their "feedback", "friendly advice" or whatever you want to call it is to make others improve, which is more in line with the idea of assessment I gave, because know what? If it's not, and these people are really trying to just give a mark and leave it at that, without caring about others improve, I'll have a hard time understanding why I'm even reading the words "friendly advice" over and over again from them.

Not everybody believes in formative assessment, either, I might add. Summative assessment is still widely popular in the United States, at least. It's primarily how learning by parser works, as well--you perform, you get a grade after the performance (DPS), and you decide what to do better next time from that information. If someone believes in using summative assessment and genuinely thinks that that will help players improve, then that is how they're going to try to help other players learn.

[Bourne_Endeavor]

It comes off as hostile though. The 90 question marks are not needed. You are already setting the grounds for bad things to happen in that run. If for whatever reason, the healer makes another mistake, what are you going to do, add 1 question mark to your already 90? Most likely a recrimination or two are going to slip, and from there it all goes downhill. The underperformer won't learn a thing, and the only thing you'll manage for them to obtain in that run is a bitter experience.

While debatable, even taken at face value, you're equating hostility with harassment. Those are vastly different things. Does it become less hostile if they type a single question mark? Putting all that aside, who made you the arbiter of player etiquette? People are allowed to express their annoyance. Now if they continuously heckle this hypothetical healer, you'd have a point. If done once? It's nothing. It certainly isn't harassment by any stretch of the definition. You're essentially demanded a safe space where people voice absolutely nothing except praise or remain silent lest they hurt someone's feelings. A potentially rude comment does not constitute harassment.

[Gallus]

You are blaming me for adding "honest" to assessment because it brings nothing when you are googling up entire definitions that are out of context.

So you believe that behind someone using the word "bad" to approach another player in an online context where most of the time nobody knows each other there is a sumative assessment?

[Dualgunner]

You are blaming me for adding "honest" to assessment because it brings nothing when you are googling up entire definitions that are out of context.

And you are ascribing the worst possible motivations to me in the middle of a conversation, which itself is not intellectually honest. Maybe you expect nothing of me, but I expect a lot more from you. I am calling you out for constantly adding modifying words to the term we are discussing.

So you believe that behind someone using the word "bad" to approach another player in an online context where most of the time nobody knows each other there is a sumative assessment?

No. I believe approaching someone saying "bad" is just being a rude asshole.

I believe making an assessment that somebody is bad and pointing it out to them at the end of an encounter can be a summative assessment.

[Gallus]

While debatable, even taken at face value, you're equating hostility with harassment. Those are vastly different things. Does it become less hostile if they type a single question mark? Putting all that aside, who made you the arbiter of player etiquette? People are allowed to express their annoyance. Now if they continuously heckle this hypothetical healer, you'd have a point. If done once? It's nothing. It certainly isn't harassment by any stretch of the definition. You're essentially demanded a safe space where people voice absolutely nothing except praise or remain silent lest they hurt someone's feelings. A potentially rude comment does not constitute harassment.

It might not qualify as harassment if you take the incident as an isolated case. However, if hostility happens on a regular basis, I believe we could start considering harassment.

People are allowed to express their annoyance.

People are allowed to do so politely.

[RoyalBeef]

Imo people are too quick too judge.

Example: I was C on Suza fight. Especially P1 is autopilot for me, so I rarely pay attention to the marker's letters anymore. However when I positioned myself getting ready for the feathers to spawn, I somehow messed up my camera movement without noticing it. So while everything looked as it always does, I was focussing B instead of C without realizing. We made it through P! with a few deaths bc of that and decided to wipe it. Of coure you immediatelyhave someone going "This group is trolling, this is not a farm party, learn the fight." Because mistakes never happen, right? Once you know a fight there is 0 chance anything will ever go wrong, because brains never derp and people just never make mistakes, ever. Jesus fkn Christ.