Guild Banks Pt. 14

[Daesûl-thrall (Daesûl)]

Well…he’s not wrong.

[Fesz-cenarius]

Those who want the non vanilla QOL convenience of guild banks simply dismiss, ignore, pooh pooh and hand wave anything and anyone that does not support their desire for that convenience.

Pot, meet kettle.

Case in point right here, folks.

[Darjuul-wyrmrest-accord]

Those who want the non vanilla QOL convenience of guild banks simply dismiss, ignore, pooh pooh and hand wave anything and anyone that does not support their desire for that convenience.

Pot, meet kettle.

Case in point right here, folks.

You don’t understand how words work, do you?

[Fesz-cenarius]

Those who want the non vanilla QOL convenience of guild banks simply dismiss, ignore, pooh pooh and hand wave anything and anyone that does not support their desire for that convenience.

Pot, meet kettle.

Case in point right here, folks.

You don’t understand how words work, do you?

I do. Apparently you don’t, though, since you chose to just try to dismiss my post and ignore the point I was making.

[Darjuul-wyrmrest-accord]

Those who want the non vanilla QOL convenience of guild banks simply dismiss, ignore, pooh pooh and hand wave anything and anyone that does not support their desire for that convenience.

Pot, meet kettle.

Case in point right here, folks.

You don’t understand how words work, do you?

I do. Apparently you don’t, though, since you chose to just try to dismiss my post and ignore the point I was making.

You see that’s the problem; I didn’t. You didn’t have an argument in the first place, you were just ranting against a mere discussion of a change, dismissing, ignoring, poo-pooh’ing and hand waving away all discussions because NOT IN VANILLA.

You know, instead of being something beyond a caricature and possibly discussing something as a human being? I guess that would be too much to ask, though. You can’t even see the irony in your own blind, willful ignorance that you claim the other side uses.

[Daesûl-thrall (Daesûl)]

So…in order to not be any of those, we should agree to change classic?
Yeah. No.
#NoChanges

[Fesz-cenarius]

You didn’t have an argument in the first place, you were just ranting against a mere discussion of a change, dismissing, ignoring, poo-pooh’ing and hand waving away all discussions because NOT IN VANILLA.

You might want to go back and read not only this thread but all those other guild bank threads, as well.

You will see all the arguments both for and against guild banks.

I do not expect you to acknowledge the arguments against guild banks as anything but “ranting”, though, since those arguments do not support your desire for the non vanilla QOL convenience change of guild banks.

In the end, though, the undeniable, irrefutable fact is that guild banks were never part of vanilla. That is the one argument that has never been countered.

[Minotron-khazgoroth (Minotron)]

I actually did counter that argument; you just refused to engage in any discussion whatsoever. You’re counter point appears to be that it would take too much dev time
You’re also pretty good at making little digs at people way after the fact without clicking the reply button so said people don’t get the chance to respond.
It’s patently obvious that you are very passionate about getting a 1:1 vanilla server; everyone here can see that. Blizzard will give you that, or they won’t.
You coming back here every 5 minutes and repeating yourself isn’t going to affect that either way.

[Mogar-stormrage (Mogar)]

The counterpoint is authenticity. Ion himself said they don’t want to use modern methods to ‘fix’ problems from Vanilla. And this isn’t even a problem. Players taking matters into their own hands, monitoring trades, and holding others accountable are all parts of Vanilla.

If a TBC server ever exists, there will be Guild Banks. Until then, deal with it.

[Fesz-cenarius]

And those decisions, whether to open the door to further changes, be it one or many, are Blizzard’s and will always be Blizzard’s to make. There isn’t really any more likelihood of them introducing further changes beyond the initial release than there is of them releasing it and doing nothing to it ever again.

Those potential “further changes” are not limited to post release. Further or additional non vanilla QOL convenience changes could just as easily be added to Classic before it is released.

[Minotron-khazgoroth (Minotron)]

And this isn’t even a problem

*to you. I do see it as a problem. That’s why I’m putting forward ideas for discussion that I don’t believe would change the functionality or gameplay.
I know that what I’m suggesting was not in vanilla in the form that I’m describing. I was there.
If Blizzard decides that hundreds of bank alts are preferable, I will deal with it

[Mogar-stormrage (Mogar)]

Your idea is to take a significant in-game feature from an expansion and add it into Vanilla. That’s never going to happen, so find another solution.

[Minotron-khazgoroth (Minotron)]

Exactly; they could also just as easily not be added. We have no way of knowing and this thread certainly won’t be the deciding factor.
The other thing is, let’s say they decide to introduce shift clicking items to the AH; there is no more reason to believe that that opens the door for further changes than there is to believe that Blizzard made a calculated decision that that is the only change they want to make to the AH.

[Tuathaa-wyrmrest-accord (Tuathaa)]

Ion himself said they don’t want to use modern methods to ‘fix’ problems from Vanilla

Where does loot trading fall into that then.
Modern method to fix an old problem

[Minotron-khazgoroth (Minotron)]

take a significant in-game feature from an expansion

*and modify it to reflect what is offered by a bank alt character so as not to affect gameplay.

[Darjuul-wyrmrest-accord]

So…in order to not be any of those, we should agree to change classic?
Yeah. No.
#NoChanges

Someone else fails basic reading comprehension it seems.

I do not expect you to acknowledge the arguments against guild banks as anything but “ranting”, though, since those arguments do not support your desire for the non vanilla QOL convenience change of guild banks.

Did I ever say, or even imply, that I’m in favor of those changes? No, I merely said that you ranting about people wanting changes is the same as people ranting about you wanting no changes. You failed to see the irony there, and you still fail to see how it’s an utter sham of an argument.

But yeah, keep building those strawmen. That’ll show everyone that you should be taken seriously and not just as a laughing stock.

The counterpoint is authenticity.

That’s not a counter point. That’s why they (likely) won’t change anything, but that’s not a counter point in a discussion about the merits, or lack there of, of guild banks (or other changes, QoL “improvements” or not).

Throwing a fit when someone brings up something that you don’t agree with isn’t entering a discussion, it’s shutting one down. That’s the problem.

[Arrtilarr-warsong (Arrtilarr)]

And those decisions, whether to open the door to further changes, be it one or many, are Blizzard’s and will always be Blizzard’s to make. There isn’t really any more likelihood of them introducing further changes beyond the initial release than there is of them releasing it and doing nothing to it ever again.

Those potential “further changes” are not limited to post release. Further or additional non vanilla QOL convenience changes could just as easily be added to Classic before it is released.

to be against any good thing just because (as you think) it !theoretically! could increase the chances that some other things could happen later, and there !theoretically! could be a bad thing among it;
this is counterproductive stance;
every single feature should be discussed separately;

and ,btw, do you also against guild chat history and guild log of invites and promotions ?

[Mogar-stormrage (Mogar)]

to be against any good thing just because (as you think) it !theoretically! could increase the chances that some other things could happen later, and there !theoretically! could be a bad thing among it;
this is counterproductive stance;
every single feature should be discussed separately;

and ,btw, do you also against guild chat history and guild log of invites and promotions ?

Rewind a little bit and you’ll hear him talk about opening Pandora’s Box. Posters may say slippery slope is a fallacy, but Ion very much is aware of it.

[Galdor-maelstrom (Galdor)]

Rewind a little bit and you’ll hear him talk about opening Pandora’s Box. Posters may say slippery slope is a fallacy, but Ion very much is aware of it.

He’s saying small changes could have ripple effects, not that making one change will lead to them implementing more and more changes as development goes on, which is what the slippery slope fallacy promoters think may happen once a change is made.

[Anadann-icecrown]

Good in whose eyes though? There was a time when people thought more flight points would be good. And dual spec. And LFR. And heirlooms. There are thousands of people playing BfA right now that think it’s good. Through their own eyes, they’re right. But to thousands of others, they could not be more wrong.

As for Pandora, how would the pro-changers (of any change, not just GBs) handle it? Do you propose leaving the ripples untouched as you’ve gotten your particular change or should there then be more changes to try and offset the ripples from the first change?