Uh...the first three questions were made by Ty. The only change I made was adding the 4th question so we could see how far people would go in adding more damage rotation, and making the first questions less biased (his original ones were biased) by allowing both answers. Instead of "Do you dislike healers? If you don't hate them, please justify why you don't hate them" with "Do you like/dislike healers? Can you explain your perspective there?", which was me removing bias, not adding bias.
This means if you think they were biased, you must think Ty's survey is biased, while you're using it for your data point. The initial iteration (though he may have changed it) REQUIRED you to answer something under "What would you add?", so people who don't really want anything added had to pick something, and a lot picked the top option (add DPS abilities). So it's funny you cite a more biased survey to try and discount a less biased one, and when the core questions of the less biased one were written by the same guy. XD
This is why ad hominem (attack on the person instead of the argument) fallacies are bad...
I should also further note Ty was the one who pointed out - to which I agreed - in the Healer survey thread, no less, that the results of any survey we put here or on Reddit would be against Healers as they are and in favor of more damage abilities since that's what players dissatisfied with the current state of Healers (who are the more likely to frequent message boards to talk/complain about what they dislike) would say. So we already acknowledged from the jump that the results were going to be biased towards "Healers right now are bad/need changing/need more DPS buttons".
Ah, right.
So in the same post you accuse me of having a biased survey despite the questions originating from Ty (I only made them neutral by allowing both like/dislike), you attack me for using the only semi-available metric we have to determine whether there are actually shortages or not, with your source that it's wrong being..."Trust me, bro"?
This will literally always be true, yes. Moreover, "interacts with the content you do in any meaningful way"? Define that EXPLICITLY. Because that's probably also down to interpretation based on what the player finds meaningful. It's not "sophistry" (ad hominem fallacy again) to point out that fun is subjective.
Seriously, I'll ask you this question:
Do you think fun is NOT subjective?
If I say something that is fun TO ME, you think that it WILL be fun TO EVERYONE ELSE because to suggest it wouldn't be is "sophistry"?
Annnd the rest of your post is the usual hysterical hyperbolic lying about what I even have suggested is good, so I won't bother responding to any of that. I absolutely love (/sarcasm) how you get so many upvotes for demonstrably lying. I didn't realize so many people like lies.
I guess as long as they're lies that agree with them/attack someone they disagree with. I can definitely believe THAT is true. While I do wish people would stop upvoting posts that amount to "personal attack with added outright lies", if that's really the kind of people you want to be, by all means, go for it. It doesn't exactly increase your credibility, though. But hey, you do you.
Seriously, I bet if I made another account, posted that Healers suck and need more DPS abilities, and then outright lied about my positions (attacking the Renathras account), even with COMPLETE lies, you guys would upvote those comments, lol
I meant Savage and older Ultimates.
For TOP specifically, you have the issue that people still progging it already have people they're working on it with, so they aren't in the pool of people to recruit much. That is, they're "already taken". And TOP is a few months old. It's current patch, but the people who really REALLY wanted to clear it likely either have already or have a group they've been working with to do so for a few months already (again, not in the recruit pool).