We’re asking the devs for a change. We’re not asking you for a change. We’re making our arguments to the devs. We don’t care about you. You have absolutely zero power to do anything. Get over yourself, you’re not important. We don’t need to prove anything to you. If you don’t want the change we’re asking for make your arguments to the devs just like we do.
Well they changed the pally seals and most people seem to like that. They changed drums and most people like that too. In fact it seems most people like most of the changes they made. What lesson do you think the people running the game should learn from that?
In the “World of Fasc”, there’s no such thing as the burden of proof, he thinks it’s imaginary. This thread has been explored in-depth in other, now historical, dual spec threads.
Key point being: you can’t win. He already doesn’t even adhere to the basic rules of argumentation, wrestle with a pig in the mud and they’ll just enjoy it etc etc.
There’s zero good reasons why it shouldn’t be added. Zero, everyone except the trolls in this thread know that. Blizzard didn’t learn a single thing from Classic. Authenticity for the sake of authenticity is an atrociously bad mantra and is proof that the Classic developers are awful at their jobs.
They’ve gone back and forth, contradicting themselves and it turns out they learned nothing. I follow a lot of the Classic team on Twitter, most of them are focused on playing Modern WoW and likely have zero clue as to what the majority of us playing TBC Classic want. They don’t know why we like the game, they don’t know how to do their jobs.
You have no metrics to support the level of complaining, this is entirely unsupported.
You supply nothing of population statistics regarding Classic vs TBCC, thus unsupported.
You then conclude that we can infer from volume of complaints and population numbers that we can measure success, this doesn’t follow.
Even if you support 1 and 2, you offer no argument or support for why you can conclude success or failure. You offer no metric of success, you offer no argument for why these and only these variables matter for success, nothing.
This is terribly argued. Do better.
I never said it was necessary. The statement you made was that people can swap on Retail to perform optimally well. The same is true in TBCC (and Classic as well). So your primary complaint about Retail ignoring significant choices is entirely undone and here you’re not rebutting me but attacking an argument I didn’t make.
They can be easily summarized if they are so numerous and, more importantly, sound and valid. Until you present them, I have no reason to acknowledge them, notably when you have demonstrated an inability to argue in good faith (see above).
Not an argument, and one you absolutely don’t live your life by in the slightest.
In a US Court of Law, burdens are not necessarily in a single place, but rather are placed in particular places according to statutory and common law. Further, burdens can frequently shift, sometimes multiple times, throughout the course of pre-trial proceedings. It is entirely a matter of rule setting, not logic.
If your grandmother suggests a wonderful cookie recipe, chances are you don’t immediately demand she qualify the recipe because you (presumably) trust her. In such a case onus would be on YOU to prove your dear grandmother wrong about the recipe.
However, if some random homeless man ran into you and claimed he had the greatest cookie recipe in the world, because you distrust such a person for good reasons, onus would be on HIM to prove his own case.
Burden of proof is not a rule of logic, it is a social convention. Here, on these forums, we don’t know one another by default, we’re all strangers. When we’re on opposite sides of a topic, people tend to get very combative, adding to the level of distrust. Thus, the only logical move to make when we all mutually distrust one another is to demand we all build up and support our own arguments.
To do differently would be special pleading. You distrust me so you demand my claims be supported. I distrust you so I demand your claims be supported. However, according to you, your claims are to be treated special and different and should not be subject to a burden of proof. That’s treating like things as unlike, which is illogical and unreasonable nonsense.
Do better.
Not sure why you enjoy lying so much, but eh, I suppose when you don’t have an argument you can’t do much else.
Your first point is incorrect, as the Devs themselves have stated.
Your second point is irrelevant and pointless, as no one is suggesting such a thing.
If you’re just going to bow out, do it with a bit more grace, not in an emotional huff.
Unless you are a DPS spec, no dual spec just turns you into a raid-logger for the most part with that character. Real fun for healers & tanks. Single-spec also limits available tanks & healers at any given time, meaning some group/raid signups fall through, especially for regular guilds & small/med pop servers.
In a debate there is no burden of proof. There’s the question being debated for the judges who make a decision. Both sides need to make their arguments for the judges. We’re making our arguments for the judges, the devs, but you keep thinking it’s about you. It’s hilarious.
Its a competition because they made it one. They thought dual specs were a slam dunk so they never imagined they would get dunked on and laughed out of the arena.
No one not even once said or even implied they thought dual spec was a slam dunk. The only people who said it was a slam dunk are those who said it’s a slam dunk it’s not going to happen and we just replied that we don’t care what you think. We still don’t care what you think.
Blizzard doesn’t care what anyone thinks, not you or me. It doesn’t really bother me. How does it make you feel? Or did you think blizzard was hanging on your every word and discussing your posts around the water cooler?
Don’t bother, they post in every dual spec thread and berate and badger anyone presenting a argument against dual spec, same trolls just parrot posting dribble,
