Please implement something to teach players how to play

[Endariel]

Just introduce the rating system at the end of the dungeons that will vary between 1 and 5 stars and will take into account an amalgamation of things: DPS, hps, overhealing, apm etc.
A very subtle way to indicate player's performance without introducing DPS meter

[Shurrikhan]

Just introduce the rating system at the end of the dungeons that will vary between 1 and 5 stars and will take into account an amalgamation of things: DPS, hps, overhealing, apm etc.
A very subtle way to indicate player's performance without introducing DPS meter

But why avoid a useful, more hands-on learning tool? There is nothing toxic about a dps meter that would not also be "toxic" about literally any other way by which someone might learn they or another are not performing as well as the average party member.

It's an underlying, preexistent conflict that is simply framed in a more conveniently analyzable way. Previously, having no information, you would simply disband and roll the dice on the next party if unable to remotely progress against a dps check. With parsers, you can look at when and for whom throughput is bogging, and address that. That's it. [A] had no direct means of recourse. [B] does. But I guess so long as A is silent and B the improvements B allows for may require talking to people, B must be toxic, right?

It's like insisting that DVDs were inherently criminal because they were the first medium on which you heard of bootleg copies being made. Had any other means, such as a x/5 stars performance rating, been our first definitive/quantifiable/analyzable exposure to unprepared or unengaged players, that would be getting the bad reputation instead (albeit pretty much only here in XIV, where basic etiquette and responsibility can be treated as oppression). Parsers are a merely an information tool. Yes, that information can be increasingly or decreasingly relevant depending on how well its framing of information fits what is intended of the game (I'd argue ACT is painfully basic/lackluster in that regard), but an information tool cannot itself create the problem it quantifies for players' analysis; it can only describe it.

[DPZ2]

Just introduce the rating system at the end of the dungeons that will vary between 1 and 5 stars and will take into account an amalgamation of things: DPS, hps, overhealing, apm etc.
A very subtle way to indicate player's performance without introducing DPS meter

"Screenshots, or you're lying." [Typical response to PF request that says 'Only 4-5 stars need apply' ... oh, wait, Yoshi P has already said that's what they want to avoid.]

[Shurrikhan]

"Screenshots, or you're lying." [Typical response to PF request that says 'Only 4-5 stars need apply' ... oh, wait, Yoshi P has already said that's what they want to avoid.]

Still beats inflated gear requirements or near-immediate disbands to make up for or reroll on the "1-star" players in your example there.

We've gone from "Do you have this thing (ilvl, prior achievements) that might point out likely performance in the content you've signed up for" to "Did you do quite well in the version of this fight one difficulty lower?"

The horror. Whatever are the players who made up for meritocratic disadvantages with gear or enough re-parties alone to do to keep their relative prestige? Players with specific skill and preparation might be able to skip that BS now. Terrible. Just terrible.