Tank entitlement vs group entitlement

[Hash_Browns]

I'm not in love with kicking anyone for playing bad.

This is what this thread comes down to for me.
If you aren't willing to kick people for being bad at the basics of the game in level +50 dungeons, then it promotes a lazy behavior.

[Granyala]

This is what this thread comes down to for me.
If you aren't willing to kick people for being bad at the basics of the game in level +50 dungeons, then it promotes a lazy behavior.

If they are bad to the point that the group cannot progress, aye. I kick too.
That never applies to dungeons though and the time you lose while waiting for replacements is usually longer than doing the second half of the dungeon (need to play 15 minutes anyway) with the slowpoke. In the end I don't care too much whether the dungeon takes 20 or 25 minutes.

[Hash_Browns]

If they are bad to the point that the group cannot progress, aye. I kick too.
That never applies to dungeons though and the time you lose while waiting for replacements is usually longer than doing the second half of the dungeon (need to play 15 minutes anyway) with the slowpoke. In the end I don't care too much whether the dungeon takes 20 or 25 minutes.

You're missing the point.
If I get bad player after bad player, I don't care if I time out the dungeon.
If you wanna finish the dungeon with someone such as myself, know your class.

[jameseoakes]

You're missing the point.
If I get bad player after bad player, I don't care if I time out the dungeon.
If you wanna finish the dungeon with someone such as myself, know your class.

I know my class but you sound like someone really unpleasant to play with. I'd much rather play with someone nice but not all that good then someone who good but rude.

[Granyala]

You're missing the point.
If I get bad player after bad player, I don't care if I time out the dungeon.
If you wanna finish the dungeon with someone such as myself, know your class.

Actually, you are the one that misses the point.
You start a dungeon, you have to play 15 minutes until you can kick the ice mage. By that time, even with an ice mage you should be past boss 2.
Now you kick him and have to wait 5 minutes for a replacement DPS.

Bottom line: you just wasted more time that you would have just going to boss 3 with the ice mage and be done with the dungeon.

This isn't WoW where you get quasi insta replacements. I had a lot of aborted runs because no replacement showed, so I don't see the point in kicking an underperforming player (even if he frustrates me) if the group still successfully kills stuff.

PS: "such as myself", may I suggest you get off your high horse? You are nothing special and this is merely a VIDEO GAME, an entertainment product. This is not (esp not in dungeons) "serious competitive business".

[Violet_Galaxy]

A lot of you people in this thread need a Hall of Novice refresher. Tank does the tanking, DPS does the DPS and Healer focuses on healing while dpsing when they can. Tanks set the pace. Really simple. When you don't follow this you encourage bad behavior and the #1 reason (imho) as to why tanks are always in demand. But y'know, keep on backseat tanking. That'll show em.

[Awha]

snip. . .

Sorry, by the what if statements I more so meant as a group should we base our judgement of a player around unseen factors? Or should we assume such factors off the bat and proceed accordingly?

Reason I ask is because I tend to treat people as I would not mind being treated, but as I have noticed that has lead to some interesting encounters because how I am okay with being treated seems to differ from the general soical or communally norms.

For future reference since I do not wish to cause players unnecessary grief do you think instead of using my level of tolerance as a baseline should I go based off some other metric? If so what would you suggest?

[Physic]

Sorry, by the what if statements I more so meant as a group should we base our judgement of a player around unseen factors? Or should we assume such factors off the bat and proceed accordingly?

Reason I ask is because I tend to treat people as I would not mind being treated, but as I have noticed that has lead to some interesting encounters because how I am okay with being treated seems to differ from the general soical or communally norms.

For future reference since I do not wish to cause players unnecessary grief do you think instead of using my level of tolerance as a baseline should I go based off some other metric? If so what would you suggest?

treat people how you would wish to be treated
or
treat people what is consistent with what would be considered treating people well in the community

pick which ever standard is higher in the situation.

Assuming of course you are not attacked.

[Gemina]

Sorry, by the what if statements I more so meant as a group should we base our judgement of a player around unseen factors? Or should we assume such factors off the bat and proceed accordingly?

Reason I ask is because I tend to treat people as I would not mind being treated, but as I have noticed that has lead to some interesting encounters because how I am okay with being treated seems to differ from the general soical or communally norms.

For future reference since I do not wish to cause players unnecessary grief do you think instead of using my level of tolerance as a baseline should I go based off some other metric? If so what would you suggest?

No worries about the what-ifs

Much like you, I was raised to treat others as I wish to be treated. To be polite, kind, and courteous towards others. I believe if everyone was like this, the world we live in would be more just, and threads like this would not exist.

Sadly, the world is cruel, and people are cruel. It is not kind, or just, or fair. Despite this, it doesn't and never will change the respect and kindness I will initially show towards others. Only when people show a lack of courtesy and respect will I return it in kind. So to directly answer your question, I am going to say no. The moment we give into defeatism, we're no better than those who are selfish and only care about their own gains in this world. It is absolute that I will be disappointed time and time again by remaining tolerant, I don't care. I refuse to change who I am, and start stepping on others to gain ground.

Tankxiety is a real thing. It does not matter how easy or difficult it actually is. It's easy for one person to get into a hot air balloon as well, but if I do it I will start freaking out as soon as it gets to a height where falling would cause injury or death. The mind is so powerful. It can cripple someone who isn't even in a threatening situation. I know this from my own experience, and I will never underestimate how it can affect others. I would never, ever try to get someone to do something they are not comfortable with. I might try to encourage them through ensuring their safety, but that is about as far as it goes.

[van_arn]

you are not riteous punishing people for being casual, in the casual content. if you dont want to play with casual players, dont go to a casual queue. Make a party finder, or shout for leet groups.

you wont get any because there is no logical reason to be leet in Random roulettes.

its only once per day, so time per run is kind of irrelevant.
there is no increase in reward for being better at it
it is designed to be hard to fail, especially with gear.

the reasons that SE refuses to design anything that might require the community to act in good faith, and consideration. They cant make dungeons harder, cant give better rewards for skillfull play, they cant have open dungeons, cant have blue mages in duty finder.

And even making the bar low, normalizing rewards per skill, and rigidly controlling and balancing jobs, people still find ways to attack each other over basic baby mode.

keep on throwing children off the fisher price keyboards man, dont defend bad lazy babies

Casual or hardcore isn't relevant. The party has all the tools and authority they need to decide what they feel is bad, and to replace anyone they feel is an obstruction.

Anything beyond that fact is merely a possibility, or petty moralizing.