Because I'm an idiotic plebeian, I'm going to start my first blog on my opinion of the difference between Objectivity and Subjectivity. Some of you may see where I'm going already. Within the Warframe wiki exists differing opinions, be it in the comment section or elsewhere. Some feel that the only way to play Warframe is to run around with TeamSpeak, permanent four corrosive projections, fully forma'd gear and thought out strategies (give or take a few, end result is hardcore).
Others feel that they should be allowed to bring whatever they want, whenever they want, irregardless of whoever says otherwise. Those are two extremely simplified personification of two major parts of the Warframe community. Those two sides tend to clash a lot, and some of the hate culminates within the wiki itself, wherever opinions are expressed. Subjective opinions like those should co-exist, yet wherever I go those opinions start a flame war that results in more salt than I have in my diet. Just the internet. Objective statements on the other hand, are statements such as "The Prisma Skana is an upgrade to the Skana." Simple enough, right? Then we have what I call, for lack of a better word, objective opinions. Such as, "The Dakra Prime is better than the Prisma Skana because [insert numbers here]". This is where the line starts to blur, and new facts exist that pollute the objectivity, because they're based on opinion. Not very good at expressing myself, I'll admit, and it'll probably sound completely wrong to anyone else.
First, I'll start off by defining what Objectivity and Subjectivity are. To make an objective statement is to be free of bias, consisting of facts and numbers alone. To make a subjective statement is to give your personal perspective or opinion, consisting not of facts. What we see a lot in the wiki, in blogs or comments however, are rarely so clear cut. Rather, they're a mix. An objective opinion is your perspective of established facts, taking into account only the facts that you personally feel are relevant, weighing each of them on a scale. It isn't the same as an opinion per se, but it's treading the gray area.
What exactly is the problem here? The problem is, in the vast number of comparisons found within the wiki, objective opinions are used, rather than objective statements. We as people try our best(most of us, anyways)to give non-subjective statements when we make our comparisons, be it between Warframes or Weapons. They end up as objective opinions. Trying to be objective is This leads to major conflict, and is becoming more of a problem within the community that make up the Wiki.
My suggestion for a solution each of us can do? Stop comparing. Nothing you say will be without bias, from the moment you hear the name of a weapon or warframe onwards. Nobody is so perfect as to have taken into account all of the factors for a comparison. There is no standardized format for a comparison. Until such a standard arises, all comparisons will not be without opposition.
Speaking of opposition, In case the above wasn't rant-tastic enough for your readers already, here you go: You can't go against what the majority of the community feels about something, and not expect disapproval, opposition and hate coming your way. For lack of a better word, the subjective majority. The subjective majority of the Warframe community feel that "Ember is ridiculously underpowered and cannot compare to other Warframes." or, "Mesa is essential for a T4D." ...I feel like phrasing will kick my butt in the previous line. Anyway, you can't just say "Ember can be useful; here's a list of reasons" and actually expect to be taken seriously. No matter how objective you are, you will always be overruled by the subjective majority. It isn't because of any singular logical reason. For example, why do people shun obesity? Is there any real objective reason?
No one's opinion is above another's. Similarly, no one's objective opinion is above another's. Comparisons between the things in Warframe can't be made seamlessly without a format, which would be near impossible to devise properly. Simple comparisons such as damage values are usually cooked bland. When you start to compare a non-factual aspect, that's when things start getting salty. So rather than discount someone's objective opinion, if you strongly disagree you should just leave it be.
This was a completely pointless rant with no real value, brought to you by a hypocritical plebeian.