Selecting need for loot

Entitlement is when person A decides that they can take person B's rights away from person B just so person A can benefit. How does simply defending person B's rights to benefit from person B's efforts to produce loot make me entitled?

I am saying that YOU, me and everyone else don't benefit from it, because in the next run the piece you need for your character can drop and the other member will need it for his companion, and next run the third member will need it. And then you have to do 4th run or more for your chance of roll to increase. So more runs => same reward.

I play normally as a tank, and if you vote to keep someone who is needing on gear for a companion, then I would leave... good luck with finding your next tank or a tank who likes to be treated that way. I will get soon enough a group without anti-social people.

Let me make it clearer then:

Player A: rolling need for character
Player B: rolling need for character
Player C: rolling need for character
Player D: rolling need for character + companion

Who here is wanting more for their share of the effort?

Actually entitlement is the feeling that you are entitled to something regardless of whether you've earned it, and in this case you should select greed for nonessential stuff, if the people who need it select greed too, then it's above reproach.

You should look up the definition of hypocritical

Player A chooses to roll need for character
Player B chooses to roll need for character
Player C chooses to roll need for character

All three have the right to roll need for character and companion, but choose to roll need for character. Their choices do not, in any way, obligate player D from exercising his right to roll need for character and companion.

Hypothetically, 4 people work for the same company, and earn the same amount. Three of those four people choose to give 10% of their paychecks to charity, thereby giving up their right to 100% of their checks. Does the fourth person have to give 10% to charity in order to avoid being accused of wanting more for their share of the effort?

Yes indeed. It's all about choice. Being courteous and considerate is a choice, as is being rude and inconsiderate.

Player D can excercise his right to be inconsiderate and Players A, B and C can excercise their rights to vote kick Player D from the group if they aren't happy about it. Player D shouldn't be surprised if they do and then come to the forums expecting sympathy.

As many have said it is a given rule that when everyone is working on an instance for loot companions or secondary and primary is your toon.

Should go in this priority order for Need:
1. Your main toon needs it as an upgrade to current gear
2. Your team member's main toon needs it as an upgrade to current grear
3. Your companion needs it as an upgrade to current gear

Then if you are not sure type:
Anyone mind if I need this for my comp?

Following these simple rules will prevent you getting the ninja rep.

I know it is tempting to need gear to improve your soloing ability, but most of us like to run in a grp and in that case your companion is useless.

And remember, it's not just you working to complete it, but the entire grp / team. I mean, if you were in a group trying to survive lost in the mountains and you came by some food, would you split the food so all party members could survive longer until you found more food, or save it until all were dead so you could last longer and not have to hunt for food as soon?

So, it's inconsiderate for player d to exercise his right to roll on loot he helped produce, but it's perfectly reasonable for players A,B and C to want to deny another player the right to benefit from their efforts?

If I'm in that group, player D gets my vote to remain, and no player D will not be me. As I said, I choose to roll need for my character, but I will back the player who chooses to exercise his right to roll. I do not expect the rest of the group to make the same choice that I make, and I am not offended or upset if they don't. Losing a roll is not the end of the world, nor the end of the game.