Quote Originally Posted by Bobby66 View Post
If it went against the foundational reasoning then the GM team would not have punished them. At the core ot has always been they cannot punish what they do not do not know. People making their rule breaks public is what fostered this weaponized apporch.

You may not like the argument but being against the rules is a valid argument. So if change wants to happen we should focus on why such tools were created, and less about how it is unfair to get punished for breaking such rules.
The argument against parsers is a Motte and Bailey argument. People defending it will swear up and down that it's about harassment, until they come across a stream where nobody is harassing anybody. Then they'll gleefully report, and retreat to the Motte, "because it's against the rules!"

Now, Square is perfectly within their rights to forbid something because they don't support it and don't want to he liable for it. It's an *annoying* position given their refusal to implement a lot of the pretty basic QOL plugins provide, but it's their prerogative.

But that's not the argument the anti-parser Inquisitors trot out every single time. It's because such tools create an atmosphere of harassment you see. So why mass report someone who isn't harassing someone? Shutup, it's against the rules! Round and round we go...

I agree, parsers do evidently cause harassment. Anti-parser zealots harass anyone they suspect of using one, with the full blessing of the TOS. Seems to me like harassment isn't their actual target. It's just the parsers. The objects, not the behavior. They're book burners hiding behind excuses.