May News/Discussions

[Chesspiece_face]

.
That's a perfectly valid point of view to take. On the other hand, note that once you're making this argument, you're into a different kind of discussion altogether. You're no longer discussing whether it is right or not to give 25-mans more (which Sirlin is; he claims that giving 25-mans more implicitly implies inferiority, just as giving 10 mans more than solo content presumably does), but only arguing about the mechanics of how Blizzard is giving 25-mans more. That's a major difference; you've gone from principle to practice. Blizzard has a certain idea of how much is proportional, and yours disagrees, but again, this is quite different from Sirlin's post which is not a proportionality discussion.

Actually that is exactly what his argument is:

Sirlin Says:

May 15th, 2008 at 5:52 am
What I’m saying is no more or less content. As a 25-man raid participant, we’d expect you to spend X hours to get Y sword. In a 10-man raid, I’d also expect you to spend X hours to get Y sword. This is not less content, that has nothing to do with anything. You might also say “but it’s hard to balance those two things to be equal.” Yeah it is. But I suggest trying, rather than committing to a 1 tier difference automatically, before you’re even out of the gate.

I think you also misread what Sirlin meant as "more".

Edit: As far as i can tell Sirlin's argument is the same as mine. If blizzard truly believes in an inclusive design than there is no reason to differentiate loot quality between group size. Obviously the amount of loot you get from a certain size group should scale, but there is no reason that the Tier in quality should have to grow with the size of your group.