Latest Official Developer Statements About Healer DPS?

[AmiableApkallu]

I'm just pointing out in my post that changing a job to remove everything that "feels bad" is stupid, especially since not every player feels bad about doing certain things. Take Aetherflow for example, people often argue that it feels bad to use Soil/Indom/Lustrate/Excog because they lose 1 ED. I personally don't feel bad for using Soil, should Aetherflow be changed because some people feel bad when they have to use Soil?

I'm also pointing out that the healer role is just that, you heal, you fix mistakes, that is what you're there to do. If someone whines about losing damage when they need to heal, I question why they're even playing a healer in the first place? It just annoys me that people keep harping on about "Only GCDs being spent on damage and all healing being relegated to OGCDs will work because using GCDs on healing feels bad!".

The thing that rankles me with the whole "feels bad" and "losing damage" mentality is that it focuses on one's personal, direct damage dealt and all but ignores the party's combined damage dealt.

Raising someone is a personal loss, but you do it because the party's total output over the entire encounter is presumably better for it. If some website with funny colored numbers doesn't recognize that, it's a problem with the website and the people using it, not healer job design.

The same goes for any other heal or for any other action that might actually require one to evaluate trade-offs and make a choice.

[Aravell]

The thing that rankles me with the whole "feels bad" and "losing damage" mentality is that it focuses on one's personal, direct damage dealt and all but ignores the party's combined damage dealt.

Raising someone is a personal loss, but you do it because the party's total output over the entire encounter is presumably better for it. If some website with funny colored numbers doesn't recognize that, it's a problem with the website and the people using it, not healer job design.

The same goes for any other heal or for any other action that might actually require one to evaluate trade-offs and make a choice.

Not only is raising someone better for the party's total damage output, it's also literally your job as a healer. A healer that won't heal or raise might as well be kicked and replaced with a RDM.

That's why I raised a hypothetical scenario before:
If a GNB/DRK says to you after a failed tankswap that resulted in the other tank's death "I can't fit Provoke into my weave window during burst, it's the other tank's fault for dying, they should've dropped stance and used Shirk!", is that an acceptable stance to have?

If it's not, why is the argument that 'healers can blame someone for not avoiding damage if they have more damage buttons' such a common one? Why would people point fingers at a tank for behaving in a way where they shirk(ha!) their own responsibilities but a healer cannot be blamed for not healing someone that took avoidable damage?