Yoshi-P Statement on Player Feedback

[Serenitey]

This is why it always helps to view people as human beings regardless of them being a developer or not, and why some people get out of tune when people 'present feedback'.

Ya if people could keep this in mind while playing the game too it would just make the community a lot better.

[Kaurhz]

This is an incorrect use of argumentum ad logicam. What you're doing right now is trying to use argumentum ad logicam to disprove that the appeal to accomplishment/authority is a logical fallacy itself. That's not how that works, but I have a feeling you already know that. It was a nice try though.

No it is the correct usage of the term because the basis of your original reply was.. Contains fallacy, therefore, invalid. Which as per your original argument you deducted that because said argument contains fallacy, therefore said argument is invalid. Without considering whether the conclusion or whether the premise of the argument was indeed correct or not. You assumed the argument was invalid on the premise that it contained a fallacy. Not only that but you done it in such a way that it misleads and detracts from the question itself.

The problem with using fallacies, or misusing for that matter is you detach the context of the argument and immediately assign fallacies, discounting whether the credentials or experience is a relevant factor for the argument being made in the first place. Which in fact if you're speaking to the worth ethic of the people in question then your understanding of the field and nuances therein is a crucial component to the argument otherwise you're creating the argument from conjecture and presenting said conjecture as a factual piece of information, and when you try to do the latter with the former then your credentials and your experience are a crucial component to argument being made. So no, said argument is not invalid "cuz fallacy".

Let's put this in a simple nature for you to understand:
"Ultimate raids in this game are very easy and they present no challenge whatsoever" (0 clears btw), my experience or lack thereof speaks to the veracity of said claims
Similarly, "Wow you only got a 70 percentile, you can't be that great then, you should try harder" (0 clears), my experience in this case or lack thereof equally speaks to the veracity of my claims. Similarly, as does my understanding of the nuances behind raiding. This would including the gearing factor, composition, and kill-time. Whether one was substantially geared or not. This is not too dissimilar from creating the conjecture that developers are lazy and incompetent. You're ignoring the nuances that can occur and the nuances that unless you've had the experience, or worked in the field then it is not something you can really lay the claim to in the first place. Whether you like it or not that is plain ignorance.

[kpxmanifesto]

No it is the correct usage of the term because the basis of your original reply was.. Contains fallacy, therefore, invalid.

You gotta understand the difference between contains fallacy, and is the fallacy. The argument that people are using in this thread is that "if you're not an expert, then you cannot criticize." That is the fallacy itself. Argumentum ad logicam doesn't disprove the fallacy itself. I've seen this mistake before, and it's a pretty common mistake to make.

[Kaurhz]

..

Except the one thing you fail to account for is that my comment was speaking to the work ethic of the people. Once again, you're attempting to remove the context from the argument. If you wish to criticise areas of content then by all means provided you can present reason and keep said discussion relevant, I've even agreed with several instances in this thread and others, and even some that I disagree with I don't denounce with comments such "You're no expert therefore your comment is irrelevant"

Going back to the whole work ethics comment. To make a comment on the ethic you once again, need substantial evidence, reasoning or qualification to support said comment, hence why my comment was indicating that you cannot make the claim on a fairly baseless whim or mere conjecture. Also, referring to the earlier post I made, this ties in pretty neatly with ad hominem, by criticising the work ethic and ethos of the developers you're blatantly ignoring the underlying issue and trying to misrepresent it as something else - When in reality they do have an issue with some of their philosophies, or going from 1 extreme to the other when it concerns simplification (e.g. crafting). To be frank, there is realistically no instance of it being a fallacy in the first place simply because the ability to produce evidence or reasonable expertise of the field (and nuances) is crucial to their argument.

To produce another example supporting. If you're working within the IT Line Support Industry, where you might notably getting mountains of tickets per day, some getting backlogged and potentially not responded to for potentially a couple of days as per SLA agreements, and then you get an angry end user on the phone "Why haven't you responded to my ticket for several days, you're so lazy" (Hangs up the phone) - This is an argument that almost stems entirely based upon their own ignorance of the field.

Yes the argument of "If you're not an expert then you cannot criticize at all" is a logical fallacy in itself. Except the premise of my argument was "You cannot attribute work ethic to laziness, when you have zero understanding of said work, or ethic" (Misattributed) - To highlight this as an issue, and why it is an issue, and why it's relevant - Within such a field people are segregated into several teams, whilst also simultaneously each having equal responsibility over the development of another team and the project itself. In a sense, those heading testing and QA are just as responsible for the end produce as the developers themselves. Feedback may or may not get tended to immediately. Similarly, those developing the work may not have their own work tested and validated or issued feedback in due course. It's a fairly abstruse process which has been grossly oversimplified and potentially entirely misunderstood on the basis that people just simply haven't had requisite exposure to said field to otherwise make an accurate comment. This is why I stand by the point. There is equally a stark difference between having a criticism and presenting it as opinion, but the moment you try and attribute it as absolute undeniable fact then that is something else entirely, especially when it pertains to work ethics, something that you can't really make an inference on in the first place.

In this instance, either the ability for people to read between the lines of the comment has diminished or I simply didn't highlight why it is an issue clear enough.

[kpxmanifesto]

Simply stating, or trying to push the agenda that the developers are lazy, particularly from people who aren't even remotely qualified to do the self-same job, or of equal proportion is almost absurdly laughable.

I don't denounce with comments such "You're no expert therefore your comment is irrelevant"

Hm, something doesn't add up here. I wonder what it is.

[Kaurhz]

Hm, something doesn't add up here. I wonder what it is.

Yes, you once again stripping away the context. Questioning someone's work ethic (which is what the derogatory term lazy refers to). "You cannot attribute work ethic to laziness, when you have zero understanding of said work, or ethic", as my post highlighted is entirely different from this premise you're trying to put forward.

[kpxmanifesto]

Yes, you once again stripping away the context. Questioning someone's work ethic (which is what the derogatory term lazy refers to). "You cannot attribute work ethic to laziness, when you have zero understanding of said work, or ethic"

Oh, context, right. If you're going to straight up lie like this, then I'll just disengage. Good luck.

[Kaurhz]

Oh, context, right. If you're going to straight up lie like this, then I'll just disengage. Good luck.

I would argue evidence to the contrary taking into accounts I've had several more meaningful debates here and elsewhere (simply because I disagree with your sentiment of lazy and incompetent being a means of any productive or valid criticism for that matter), but by all means misattribute away all you wish.

[Nishira]

You guys do realize the target group that Yoship is referring to are those Japanese extreme players who mailed knife blade as threat right?
These guys are the worst and can even go as far as burning down an anime studio.
These are the group that constantly making verbal threat and stalking.
He is not referring to the snowflakes who always using subscription as threat, those are just sheeps.
He is talking about the real wolves here.

That’s horrible. I can imagine if things like that have happened that the developers are unnerved and upset.

But even if it were about the more ‘normal’ (unfortunately) rather abusive feedback, I’d get it. I’ve never understood the point of it either, it’s not hard to criticise in a friendly or even just respectful manner. And with games, if you’re exasperated because of not feeling heard after trying to address something for years, it’s better to take a step back and contemplate whether you can live with it the way it is, or feel better about unsubbing (temporarily). I’d never judge the frustration or disappointment over this, and I get that that can make someone a bit more heated. But personal attacks, contempt, bitterness won’t fix it and they just make you feel like crap. Better to leave your feedback in a respectful manner so that someone may actually feel compelled to read it, and go do something which does give you positive vibes imho.

[Driavna]

Precisely. That's why the whole "you need to be an expert on something to have an opinion on something" argument falls flat.

You will never see those pushing for "you need to be X before doing Y" using that logic for praising/endorsing something.