The idea that spamming taunt on cool down is advisable because you might get lucky and coincidentally hit it right when you lose agro is one of the most insane tortured rationalizations I've ever come across, even judging by DSM standards.
Let's consider a metaphor:
Imagine your doctor offered you a weekly subscription to a magic pill that would immediately cure a cold, on the condition that it be taken within a few hours of symptoms first appearing. For our purposes this pill is named Taunt. Unfortunately, Taunt has a very short shelf life, and only lasts for about a week and then must be disposed of (consider this a 7 day "cool down"). So with your subscription to Taunt you only ever have one good pill on hand at a time, and in order for it to be effective you must be prepared to take it within a few hours.
By DSM's tortured logic, he would just take the Taunt pill immediately upon receiving it every week, even if he currently has no symptoms, under the justification that he theoretically might get lucky and arrest a cold right as it begins by sheer luck. This, of course, would leave him without the pill for the remainder of the week, during which he would be entirely unprotected should his symptoms emerge during that period. Obviously, this is not an ideal approach.
Hopefully this metaphor illustrates the foolishness of DSM's reasoning and will cause him to reevaluate his thinking on this matter. Any takers on that bet?
|