No, You May Not Roll on Items for Another Class and Strip Out the Mods

No it does not. Please stop asserting this false allegation. It is false. Fact not opinion.

Setanian refuses to entertain this analogy.

I've never said they are inferior. To each their own. I do feel strongly that needing on everything for all aspects of your character over another real player is morally bankrupt in a social game - but I don't think they are inferior.

Just ill-informed.

So play the right way. Need on what you need. Why do you keep bringing up straw man arguments to confuse the issue?

On one hand you want an equal right, which you already have, and on the other you are asking us to not to need on what we want.

Pretty sure I quoted the person I was referring to.

How can it be ill-informed? Ill-informed means not to know something or to have bad information.

I know, I don't have bad information. I know each of the 4 players get to roll, they choose how. Which part am I ill-informed about ?

At the very least, if you're going to continue posting, please be constructive and quit bullying people, please. Please give us some constructive ideas.

Do I need to give a statistics class here? Fine.

Sample selection is one of the most critical tasks in the proper application of statistical modeling. It must be properly random and free of bias, or any attempt to extrapolate the state of the group at large will be invalid.

There are a great many things which can corrupt a sample: self-selection (i.e. asking for volunteers) is a prime one. Sample restriction (i.e. selecting your sample from a smaller sample, rather than the whole group) is another. Pretty much at the top of the list is laying out a honeypot to draw people in, followed right behind an environment with coercive intimidation.

Guess what? Your thread count has all of them. You're looking at a sample drawn from an already tiny subsample (the forum), which used an emotional honeypot to draw people in (thread title) where people were bombarded with intimidation and coercion for disagreeing with your side (blacklist threats, give me your server/character name, insults and name-calling) and then counted only people who chose to respond.

In short, you'd get laughed out of the first week of an undergrad stats class with something like that. I'm sure it makes you feel better to spend all that time counting people who agree with you and think it means something (that's called confirmation bias) but in the grand view of analyzing the broader community, it's not just meaningless, it's outright lies and propaganda.

No, it doesn't. It shows 0 respect for any other player who has different priorities than you do.

No, it really doesn't change their potential reward. Their potential remains exactly the same. Potentially they can win every drop in the flashpoint.

My way give everyone the exact same chance of reward instead of favoring people with a specific loot priority. It's about fairness.

Wrong.
"you can roll for anything you want"
is more fair than
"you can not roll for things you want because someone else has an arbitrary rule based on priorities that that you don't agree with."

It doesn't matter whether everyone choose to exercise their right; the fairness is all about choice and whether you choose to exercise that choice or not, it's more fair to have it than not to have it.

No, I don't impose any of my beliefs on anyone. They're free to need or greed as they want.

They just don't get to impose their belief's on me.

If I roll need only on items that directly improve my character (not companion, not for looks) while YOU roll on everything for any reason - you will get more items over time.

That is a fact.

How you can't grasp that rolling 100x vs. 10x is going to give you more is beyond me.