Ask your question and quote the relevant text to which you are referring. I'll try to give you an answer.
Ok, first you claimed that my original arguments weren't articulated well and attempted to sum it up in your own words below.
Now here's the definition you've been using: A master of X is a job that SE thought everyone would use to accomplish X, regardless of whether or not the game mechanics, metagame or class design actually supports it.
Did I hit the nail on the head there, or would you like to do a better job of articulating your position?
I countered to say that wasn't it but this below.
My argument is that SE designed jobs to fulfill certain roles, primarily to be unique. How the players decide to play the jobs is up to them. I would argue that SE never meant to pigeon hole a specific job into a specific game play. Doing so defeats the purpose of having multiple jobs with various traits, abilities, skills, etc. I would argue that they prefer diversity, which is the whole reason of Abyssea procs.
Instead of admitting the difference you claimed that they were the same by saying below..
So basically yes, the summary I gave was the definition you subscribe to.
I responded to you by demonstrating the difference and asking you to tell me what was so poorly articulated that you couldn't see the difference in the quotes below.
Those two statements are saying the exact opposite. Your statement says that SE designed jobs to do certain things REGARDLESS of anything. That is implying that PLDs should be tanks in any situation. I'm arguing the exact opposite. My statement says that SE designed jobs to fulfill certain roles (to guarantee that a job is able to fulfill it) but prefers diversity. Which means, PLD is designed to be the tank, but promotes diversity upon other jobs to be able to tank.
I've stated numerous of times that what the job was designed to do and how the job is played are two completely different things. That is how it's possible to be the "master" of something but not the most desired. The most desired can/will change as the game change and people do different things. That doesn't have any effect on which job was designed to fulfill a role and vice versa. Just because people decide to chain weak VT mobs instead of heavy hitting IT+ shadow killing mobs, doesn't magically make NINs a "Master" of tanking. That's determined by the design of the job. How you play the game determines which job is best suited for the mission.
All you have done is proven my point.
I would love for you to try to explain how that was poorly articulated. What else could I have done?
After that explanation, you responded with the comment of arguing with a very verbose wall. That's why I asked in a very short response if you understood the difference of the statements or not, in the text below.
Well, do you not see the difference in the two statements?
1. SE designs a job for people to play it a certain way regardless of anything.
2. SE designs a job to ensure that at least one job is able to fulfill in a certain role, but promotes diversity.
This is when you responded with the following below
You lack clarity.
I'm no longer certain of what we're even arguing anymore, such is your cavalcade of verbosity and penchant for obfuscation.
State your terms with extreme brevity that we might begin our cycle of parry and riposte anew.
So, I've been asking you to support those claims to show me what part of those two statements are verbose, obfuscated and without clarity?
Till now, you've been +1'ing your trolling desire. So are you going to answer the question or not?