Yes, you roll dice. They aren’t about rolling dice. Surely you understand the difference, right?
It doesn’t matter if it’s a ton of communication or not. The amount you say is up to you. You can spam chat or ask people personally, it doesn’t matter. What does matter is having a button to do that interaction for you. Please read or watch a video on basic RPG game design, or listen to any game designers of MMOs from when this game was new.
No it didn’t adversely affect the game. A lot of things did but RDF wasn’t one of them. And as far as the devs go, yeah they decided a lot of things that were definitely NOT good for the game. WoD, for example.
Welp, a lot of us who were there disagree. And this includes the dev team, which is all that matters at this point. 
Oh so it doesn’t matter after all that sulking for “social experience”
You just said it didn’t matter though… I’ll get you a chair, I can’t stand to see someone back themselves into a corner so hard and thrash their own argument like this.
Is WOW a basic RPG? Are all RPGs designed the same way? No. You sound like an anti-vaxxer… “I watch a youtube video tho!” and you’ve made a massive fool of yourself.
RDF is not in Wrath Classic. I think you have mixed sulking with pleased, because a lot of us are pleased right now. 
The minority, the classic andys. The majority isn’t. Sorry to break it to you. You going to make a fool of yourself too, like your boy Fahundo?
There is no RDF in Wrath Classic, and I am pleased.
Good for you? You are the minority.
pleased is pleased. Though I would be happier if Blizz were to make a real fix to server populations that keeps the integrity of both the world and instanced content, ie:
Are you trying to make a point? Because you aren’t doing a good job.
Ok? Still waiting.
World of Warcraft supports a lot of solo play. However, we want dungeons to be a group experience. In fact, we think the game is more fun overall when you play with friends, which is why we put so much effort into encouraging players to join guilds for Cataclysm. Running a hard dungeon with friends tends to be a much better experience. Communication feels less awkward, and everyone is generally more supportive of mistakes. You learn the strengths and weaknesses and nuances of players that you run with regularly. There tend to be fewer loot arguments as well. PUGs have their place – don’t get me wrong. But we don’t want to sacrifice dungeons being fun and challenging for organized groups in order to have everything be conquered by any possible group. Make sense?
Sharing your own thread with a bad point? Cool.
Which dev team? Which dev said RDF adversely affected the game? Pardo loved it.
Well no the dev team then didn’t disagree since they you know added RDF.
The current dev team which has managed to tank retail disagrees, but then they hardly have a track record of making good decisions.
I’m sorry, I made the assumption that you would keep up with the intellectual level instead of throwing a tantrum like your last reply. I’ll try to say 1+1=2 instead of sum[(1/2)^n] where n:(-∞,∞)=2.
I presented more than one case in which that premise becomes false. Instead of accepting a logical conclusion, you try to get out of it by introducing the concept of “rule of law”. Your premise is false, period.
Picking a definition that matches your narrative is not a counter-argument. This one is easy: when you talk on the phone, a social interaction happens but it’s not face-to-face; whatever it is we are doing, it’s not face-to-face. That definition is incomplete, period.
Do you see the contradiction there? I bet you don’t.
In other words, it is ok when you do it, but not when others do it? I see how it is.
No need to add anything else.
Fine, I won’t say ad-libitum, I’ll say “as you please”; I won’t say de facto, I’ll say “in fact”; I won’t say ergo, I’ll say “therefore”… unless those confuse and misdirect as well.
No, I haven’t. This is the result of undoing your attempt of controlling the narrative. Definitions are important; if you can’t accept a definition, then we can’t have a conversation, period.
Yet, it isn’t in the game.
Wouldn’t adding RDF be the same? Because it would change the way we play, and don’t go pretending that it wouldn’t impact play-style and social dynamics.
Ironic, this paragraph can be applied to the argument of “RDF won’t impact the social aspect”.
My conclusion is that the concept of double standard is strong in you. You can’t accept a definition, then you go and pick one that suits your narrative. You control others’ narrative, but it’s not ok when they try to stop you. Arguments are logic and valid when they support pro-RDF arguments, but disregard them when not. When anti-RDF do something, it is bad, but when the same is done by pro-RDF it is acceptable.
I’m done talking to you, capisci? Oops, force of habit, do you understand that?
No one is saying get rid of LFG… just add RDF, because it should be there., it’s what people want.
Psychology is pseudo-science.
the psychology of a deviant
Are you saying you’re a deviant?