Unfortunately, I concur. I doubt many of the people calling for any class to be ‘balanced’ are consulting vast quantities of empirical evidence and compensating for cognitive bias. They’re emotive, vitriolic, and relying on anecdote (Whenever I fight X), intuition (It's just so obvious!), logical fallacies (I play this class too so my call for damage reductions is somehow more valid; post hoc nonsense; ad populum idiocy; etc), or cherry-picking of data (Look! This one screenshot shows X doing 900k damage! This is proof that they need damage reductions!... Let’s ignore any specific environmental conditions that made this possible and generalise it!). Equally, I don't see those that play the targeted classes providing data and they're typically guilty of the same failings.
If people calmly gather representative, randomised samples and subject them to analysis in order to confirm confidence then I’ll gladly accept their points on any classes. Until such a time, they can take their frail, pathetic human emotions elsewhere and I sincerely hope Bioware don't defer to the typical model of instant gratification on these matters. Sadly, the Operative/Smuggler changes suggest otherwise (unless it was coincidence that their changes coincided with the uproar).
I went to college. I have a bachelor degree. I am fairly intelligent...i think. But are you talking to gamers here or is this a page from your doctoral thesis? Seriously my friend, using language that even educated people gape at is simply ridiculous; "empirical, cognitive bias, vitriolic, anecdote, logical fallacies, post hoc, ad populum"... really?!? Does anyone even respond to you? Well, I guess I did, but only because I'm still trying to figure out *** you're saying.