Yep probably so. It’s definitely childish and doesn’t forward the discussion in a productive direction - you can include me in that list, I’ve done that too.
But it’s not one sided. I’ve already covered enough some of the seriously underhanded and dishonest tactics a small but vocal number of the pro DS argument have been using. The whole #allchanges thing came out of return fire against Zyrius mainly, who tried to cast anyone not for dual spec as advocating #nochanges - also a demonstrably false claim.
#allchanges was then used as a mirror to that tactic essentially to show it up.
Ideally we can go forward without using either unhelpful slogan.
Edit: I believe you’re commenting in good faith thus why I am willing to be less guarded and defensive in response. There has to be a circuit breaker to the toxicity of this topic.
I agree I’ve been a bit facetious and short, particularly with Feywaif. It’s infuriating to try have a debate and then have utterly disingenuous statements like “you literally haven’t provided one argument against dual spec!”. We have, several times. I know it’s a long thread and nobody wants to trawl through it but it’s incredibly bad faith.
It’s interesting that you state that, considering many of the dual spec proponents in this thread said they would advocate that “dumb stuff”.
I don’t consider them “dumb stuff”. I consider them “different stuff” and it was enlightening to see what people’s thoughts on it were. When you take Dual Spec specifically out of the picture, Feywaif’s argument came down to majority rule and Zyrius supported introducing other options QoL features that don’t disrupt core interactions with other players.
If you consider them “dumb stuff”, you should be prepared for other people to request them once Dual Spec is added because you won’t have any ethical high-ground to fall back on. I’m not saying that as a threat or slippery slope fallacy, just as an observation about the framework your proponents are using to justify changes.
I’m honestly impartial about whether Dual Spec is actually added, though I do personally disagree with it. However, any decision should be free of false-equivelance justifications.
Well I’ve asked people multiple times what they’re in game issue with dual spec is and most of it has just boiled down to “it wasn’t in TBC originally” so #nochanges
When people make an actual game play argument why dual spec would be bad I’ll address, there just aren’t any good ones. The closest is people would use it in raids, which is fair enough, and adding a cool down + being in a rested area fixes that complaint.
I’m sorry, but every time I scroll past this statement it makes me uncomfortable, so I feel like I should say something.
In basic reasoning, the logical negation of “Y is false for all X” is NOT “Y is true for all X”, it’s “Y is true for at least one X”. The particular instance of X for which Y is true (there could be several) is called a counterexample.
Applied to this thread, all it takes to be against #nochanges is to support one or more change. Not every change. In other words it’s quite possible to be #somechanges simply by supporting dual spec and nothing else. Which is also blizzard’s own policy by sheer virtue of their actions (including some, but not all, changes from expansions further down the road than tbc, in tbcc).
People have given you reasons you just choose to make out that they haven’t.
Disagree with them by all means - you don’t have to give credit to the reasons, but pretending they aren’t offered is intellectually dishonest.
#nochanges isn’t an argument, it’s a tag - a signal. Simply don’t use it. Address the actual claim with an actual argument.
There’s a reason I stopped repeatedly answering your questions, because it was pointless, you’d always pretend the answers weren’t given no matter how detailed they were and then respond with the purile and pointless #nochanges.
Oh yeah and let’s not forget people who use partial quotes because putting the whole quote for proper context doesn’t help their case.
I’ve asked you multiple times to provide an actual in game reason you don’t want dual spec and you are unable to do so. If your argument is just that that’s the way it was, that’s fine, bu just say so, don’t fabricate false reasons dual spec would be bad.
Partial quotes are fine, partial quotes with the aim to convey a different meaning are not fine.
Your response to let’s not use #nochanges was to then justify why you should use it. Which makes me smash my head on the table.
The main objection I had with Keshua was that he actually doctored my comments to convey opposite meanings. That’s straight up lying. Don’t pretend there’s equivalence or that my criticism of that shoddy behaviour is in some way not warranted. I’m not in principle opposed to partial quotes. I’m opposed to lying. If you don’t see a difference I don’t know what to tell you.
Anyway I’ve editted it so the context is clearer now.
I refuse to give you answers to the same question that I’ve answered for you already over and over again yeah. Of course because your motives stink. There’s only so often you fall into the same trap before you feel like a fool for doing so.
Feywaif has a pretty apt quote from earlier saying that, on other issues, he could quite easily find himself on the opposite side of the table to Ziryus, or Fasc, or myself. It’s an open admission of honest debate in that, we haven’t formed a cabal, we’re not trying to present a united front to make our position look stronger.
Literally every like I have thrown out in this thread is because I’ve read a post of the poster’s and gone damn, that is well thought out and reasoned. Posts on merits just like issues.
I am quite sure there are issues where Feywaif and I disagree, I think LFD is one of them - although I’m gradually changing my mind as the game gets deader and deader. When it was thriving, though - I felt that one of the biggest drawcards to classic was server communities, rivalries, reputation, seeing the same people again and again, whereas retail was just a soulless mishmash of servers and anyone i saw out in the world or dungeon I would probably never see again.
Look all you have to do is say “I don’t want it because that’s not how it was” and leave it at that. But if you’re going to make up convoluted reasons why it would be bad expect to be questioned on it.
And I’ll discuss real issues in good faith, IE if there’s a concern that people would be flipping too often in raids, which is sure possible, that’s an issue that can actually be discussed.
I don’t understand why you keep bringing this up over and over. It’s just bloating the thread pointlessly.
You say, here’s this quote from devs 15 years ago about why dual spec won’t be added.
We point out the current devs have already made changes to the game that are in direct conflict with the position of the devs of 15 years ago on various issues, like hvh, like multiboxing and input broadcasting software.
You claim this evidence is irrelevant because it doesn’t literally relate directly to the issue of dual spec, which I happen to think is completely daft, but whatever, lets leave it there.
Can we move past this circular argument, it’s getting boring.
Ok, here’s what I find infuriating. I posted and you replied:
We is defined as " I and the rest of a group that includes me." What group am I referring to? Everyone who supports DS? No, I defined the group in my first sentence, “several of those supporting dual spec.” This is basic English and reading comprehension. Either you’re not very good at it or you’re deliberately trying to mislead.
This is another of your deliberate attempts to mislead. I posted:
I didn’t say the “only one” or even “the one.” One criterion means one of several. It’s basic English that you don’t seem to understand. There is no one reason to make any change. Majority rules alone isn’t enough to make a change. That it makes the game more fun for me isn’t enough to make a change. That’s what I mean when I say I look at each change individually. I weigh the good and the bad, how it affects me personally and how it affects other people with different play styles, and how it affects the game.
Every time I talk to you I have to wade through this bs. Usually I ignore it because reading comprehension isn’t given the priority today that it was given when I went to school. Many people aren’t very good at it. Educators have acknowledged that and have dumbed down the reading comprehension sections of tests like the SAT. The importance of it has even been downgraded in college admissions because too many people were doing poorly on it.
this isn’t provable in any way. They added it in Wrath, so there was definitely a business driver.
Not a reason not to do something. This is not a drawback or counter argument, it’s theory.
This is also not a reason to forego improvements to the game for other players, just because some people are ok with things staying the way they are (or are asking for a faithful recreation, which they did not get, and whose ship has sailed). This is literally a place where people can ask for things.
I’m pretty sure the only objection that is actually gameplay related is the possibility for abuse in raid scenarios, for which the cooldown has been offered as a resolution. I’m really struggling to understand what other objections are tangible to players that have an actual effect on their gameplay.
Yeah lol i was going to say. You LITERALLY defined the group you were talking about, saying “theres a subset of us pro dualspeccers who evaluate all changes based on their merits” and then hes like “you dont speak for all dual speccers”. Yeah like no sh lol, hes talking about the subset who specifically have the viewpoint he’s talking about.
Yeah legit, hey. I had the same thing before when i went on my rant about the opposite of none isn’t all, it’s some; this is logic 101. You straight up can’t have a discussion with people if they can’t even make it to the starting line with reading comprehension and elementary reasoning.
Not for me; the gold is the primary concern. I would assume the actionbar swapping comes for free since that’s already how the feature worked in wrath.