They Should Add An Official Damage Meter With One Condition

[Hoodcat]

look at when asmongold came, prolly same people harassed him bc they didnt want their game to be toxic. So their awnser was to grief and be toxic.

Toxic is gana be toxic when toxic can no mater the form.

[VelKallor]

Tell that to the toxic casuals mass reporting people for streaming with it.

In both the Arthars case and in this one, the suspension was enacted PRECISELY because they were streaming FF 14 content with addons visible. They were PUBLICALLY broadcasting a stream with addons they KNEW were not allowed.

Arthars was streaming from a VERIFIED Twitch channel.

Let me restate: they were streaming FF 14 raid content on a public channel whilst they were using addons and meters they KNEW they were not allowed to use. They were reported for that and rightly so. You may not like it, but they broke TOS and did so in front of thousands of viewers.

Im sorry they got suspended, but thats on them and no one else. It also sent a message to other streamers, dont do this. Hopefully, they will listen.

[Semirhage]

In both the Arthars case and in this one, the suspension was enacted PRECISELY because they were streaming FF 14 content with addons visible. They were PUBLICALLY broadcasting a stream with addons they KNEW were not allowed.

Arthars was streaming from a VERIFIED Twitch channel.

Let me restate: they were streaming FF 14 raid content on a public channel whilst they were using addons and meters they KNEW they were not allowed to use. They were reported for that and rightly so. You may not like it, but they broke TOS and did so in front of thousands of viewers.

Im sorry they got suspended, but thats on them and no one else.

Ah, the Motte and Bailey switch I knew was coming next.

So where's the problem? Rules exist for a reason. In theory, at least. Good rules should be written with attention paid to their foundational reasoning. Why are parsers against the TOS? I've heard over and over and over and over and over and over again that it's the harassment potential.

And the moment we point at a prominent example where the *stated reason* behind that rule wasn't in play at all, said rule was enforced anyway. So what is the takeaway from this? It's certainly not "harassment is bad". It's "third party tools are punishable if 5chan gets mad about it".

Claiming it's about harassment potential, then when confronted with the fact that public, visible enforcement has nothing whatsoever to do with harassment fleeing to the Motte of "who cares it's against the rules either way SO THERE" is a boring trick. Save it for the tourists. Your beef isn't with harassment, it's with the existence of facts. Stats. Math.

[Saraide]

Ah, the Motte and Bailey switch I knew was coming next.

So where's the problem? Rules exist for a reason. In theory, at least. Good rules should be written with attention paid to their foundational reasoning. Why are parsers against the TOS? I've heard over and over and over and over and over and over again that it's the harassment potential.

And the moment we point at a prominent example where the *stated reason* behind that rule wasn't in play at all, said rule was enforced anyway. So what is the takeaway from this? It's certainly not "harassment is bad". It's "third party tools are punishable if 5chan gets mad about it".

Claiming it's about harassment potential, then when confronted with the fact that public, visible enforcement has nothing whatsoever to do with harassment fleeing to the Motte of "who cares it's against the rules either way SO THERE" is a boring trick. Save it for the tourists. Your beef isn't with harassment, it's with the existence of facts. Stats. Math.

The classic it's bad because it's against the rules and it's against the rules because it's bad circle. If you get someone to break out of that, let me know. People like that would be upset about freeing slaves because it was technically against the law.

[Jaquan]

Let me ask you this. If someone suddenly told you you scored 12 points and left it at this would it mean anything? No extra information, no context nothing. Just a number. And that's what DPS meter would be in vacuum. There's really a lot of work that's needed to be done if there's ever going to be serious attempt at using Damage Meter as an improvement tool for players there's a lot of data you actively need provide at moment's notice. What's average damage? How does Player's performance compare to it? What's practically achievable maximum at any stadium if the class progression? How much of that is actively required to clear content at given level and difficulty. Without this data to draw on the Damage Meter isn't different from any random scoring method. Just assigning score among party members without putting it into context doesn't invoke Improvement but may lead to even more toxic interactions even if they wouldn't cross the lines marked by ToS. We're already damn creative at being pricks to one another without breaking it.

Ultimately it's not a bad idea but it's something that would require titanic effort to implement right. Effort that neither Devs or community is willing to put.

[SwingLifeAway]

Ultimately it's not a bad idea but it's something that would require titanic effort to implement right. Effort that neither Devs or community is willing to put.

So then just let us use our own without being afraid of eating a ban because some puritanical loser wants to do a funny?

[VerdeLuck]

So then just let us use our own without being afraid of eating a ban because some puritanical loser wants to do a funny?

Nothing is currently stopping you from that unless you stream or are toxic to other players with it. The fact you're so concerned about being banned for it would seem to suggest, like when people were upset of the TOS "not letting them give advice anymore", that you're probably using it to be toxic and want a free pass to do it. You're not going to get that.

[Jaquan]

So then just let us use our own without being afraid of eating a ban because some puritanical loser wants to do a funny?

If you leave no proof, mention it nowhere when it can be linked to your character then you're free to use them. You won't be banned for those simply due to lack of proof unless you post a screenshot or stream with the damage tracker visible. Crazy Puritans can kiss your behind if they won't have any proof or at the very least you won't get banned for 3rd party tools.

[Rilifane]

I love how the people that have oh-so-much experience with oh-so-many MMOs keep ignoring the fact that the reason why straightforward insults were more common in WoW than here was the lack of moderation.
People only get temp/ perma bans in extreme cases. I saw the same people in battlegrounds saying things like "keep zerging like idiots, good fucking job you morons" for months and they didn't face consequences for their language. Adding to that that the MMO playerbase was younger in the earlier days of WoW than here and you had a bunch of teenagers/ young adults doing what they wanted. It doesn't take a genius to know where this would go but apparently it's still too difficult for some people to grasp the difference.

Parsers were not the reason for straight up insulting being more common there than it is here.
The lack of moderation was.
Accept it.
We have very strict moderation here.
Adding a parser would change nothing about the ToS to protect people from harassment or their enforcement.
So keep telling everyone and their grandma about your "But then everyone will scream and yell obscenities at the top of their lungs non stop and people are helpless against it" apocalyptic scenarios - it doesn't make them true and doesn't disguise that the true beef isn't with harassment when neither the ToS about harassment nor their enforcement would change.

[VelKallor]

So keep telling everyone and their grandma about your "But then everyone will scream and yell obscenities at the top of their lungs non stop and people are helpless against it" apocalyptic scenarios - it doesn't make them true and doesn't disguise that the true beef isn't with harassment when neither the ToS about harassment nor their enforcement would change.

I said that the parser was a factor, not a main cause. i never said otherwise. From one leads to the other. Quite frankly, Im not the only one who saw this, I could try and explain further, but theres no use in arguing with a closed mind. Suffice it to say that that factor is one in a concatenation of avoidable mistakes made over the last ten years.