Yes, I acknowledge I misrembered your exact quote. But you would have gladly had people believe my comment was an abject falsehood and character assassination when it was based on a true statement, entirely in context and mostly accurate save one minor detail.
As I’ve said multiple times: petulant and contrarian.
Actually, how could you even have called me a liar? I thought everything on this forum is just opinion. I can’t be a liar if I was speaking my opinion.
It is the only card I have but it’s a pretty dang important one. And no, you haven’t shown me it is irrelevant. Statisticians around the world will tell you that multiple polls with incorrect sampling do not balance each other out, they merely compound error.
It’s pretty dry and you may still be right in the end. But right now, the evidence is inconclusive.
I have a very collegial relationship with my colleagues but I tell them the same thing when they come for me asking for ICT enhancements: demonstrate there is a need for it. Don’t give me anecdotal evidence and expect us to fork our hundreds of thousands of dollars for a change.
It was an abject falsehood and character assassination. People can either believe you intentionally did that or believe you have poor reading comprehension. I know of no other explanation. That I mentioned the SATs and claimed they have been dumbed down over the years is in no way a claim that I performed better than newer generations on said test. I have never nor would I ever compare my scores on a test to the scores of someone taking a different test.
It was entirely in-context. Also
Guess you’re just not smart enough. 🤷
I think it’s obvious that it was not. But anyone reading can decide for themselves.
The question posed by the OP was not why should or should not dual spec be added but why do people oppose dual spec.
Those are all fair answers, most people refuse to/cannot give any in game reason why dual spec would be bad and just don’t like the idea of others using it for “reasons”
Exactly. Not “Can a bunch of proponents for Dual Spec please come and misrepresent the opposition arguments with facetious strawmen”? Unless OP was being sarcastic, in which case the responses were par for the course, I suppose.
Come on, Ziryus. You and I both know that’s not true.
Yes there has been one legitimate issue raised, which is that it might impact raids, great add a cool down and/or a requirement to be in a town which most would be fine with. But as soon as that gets mentioned the people raising that issue suddenly change tune to we just don’t want you to have it.
Well you’d have to actually counter argument.
So far I’ve read…
“The poor npc needs to be relevant!”
And
“Oh so now we should just go and titan forging and garrisons!?”
See our points. These should be dismissed.
Make dual spec a reward incentive for transferring to a server in a way that improves the faction balance. (transfer would be free ofc)
Now I’ve read the worst comment yet.
This one here Mr. FBI
Just FYI, we’re posting in the wrong thread because you were quoted in this thread, too. But there is definitely more than one legitimate counter argument raised in that and the other threads. Even if you personally disagree with those concerns it doesn’t make them wrong or illegitimate.
Well sure, #nochanges is a legitimate argument, there’s nothing wrong with nostalgia.
It’s just not an argument blizzard cares about for TBC Classic.
All of these were online polls that can easily be distorted by anyone that has an idea how IP addresses work, VPN, scripting, exc.
Omg thank you…
I was gonna say lemon threads are the worst I definitely didn’t comment in his awful posts
Ty for the heads up.
“Authentic recreation” shows blizzard does care about keeping things in line with origional tbc design gaol intentions. Not saying it’s the defining factor and causes nochanges, but it’s part of what they consider when looking at possible changes.
If they didn’t consider it a valid point that would mean #allchanges was on the table. They never said that. They said some changes, not all changes.
Okay and dual spec is some changes, not all changes.
Yet your trying to use past changes as justification for it. So that is, by its very definition, the slippery slope, which means all changes.
Well no, past changes are being used to show you that your #nochanges argument is garbage, you just can’t come up with anything else.
You made this post purely because its been pointed out before that you generally post the opposite of what the majority want. This post is to save face and nothing more.