Ok, it's been a while since I've opened discussion on terminology and what I do and do not like. Last I recall I ranted about not liking the terms "B elf" (without the space, means Blood Elf), "FireLock" (bleh), "Afflock" (double bleh), and others. I write this in good fun, and not to be hurtful or bash anybody that uses these terms.
Today, I would like to discuss the term, viable. People are always asking if this or that is viable. To quote a movie whom some of you might know, "I do not think it means what you think it means" - Inigo Montoya from the Princess Bride.
I looked it up. The most common definitions for viable include (
source &
source &
source):
- Capable of germinating, living, growing and developing.
- An occurrence with a good chance of persisting as long as no serious adverse modifications occur.
- feasible: capable of being done with means at hand and circumstances as they are.
Of those definitions, the closest one I see to what is being used here is number 3. However, Asking if build XYZ is feasible will always result in an answer of YES simply because it is capable of being done with the means at hand and the circumstances as they are! You can run SSC as affliction, you can run it as demo or destro too. YES you can hit arena in season 1 or any of the others, or even dungeon gear. Heck, you can run it in greens if you want. I'm sure you can even run it with no gear on, though it might not be as easy or as much fun, or even all that great to watch.
I think what everyone is really asking is, Is this the most efficient or effective build/armor/etc... And not, is it capable of germinating, or is it feasible.
What do you all think? Do you have any words that have been bugging you?