Why Ratings Are Not Objective.

The thread for reporting discussion problems is Report discussion problems here: No.2.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Hi petrophysics1,I think I am one of the liberal loons on the board, and yet I have an even lower rating than you.(I have a feeling my low rating has nothing to do with my quality of arguments, but rather my personal hygiene) drone

You got a bunch of "1's" in a row in that Obama thread. See what happens when you fail to support Obama!... Anus

Is it art imitating life or life imitating art? I am so cold and lonely.
(and disheveled?)

I agree, which is why I don't take the whole rating system seriously. I don't even know why we have it.If people need that kind of reassurance in their lives to keep their fragile ego's intact, then I feel sorry for them.

---

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams

Why even have a rating system at all though? If your post makes an impact on someone, let them praise it in the P.O.T.M. I don't see a way it could be objective.I used to belong to debate.org before coming here. Essentialy someone posted a debate topic and another person could engage in the debate. You had 3 rounds to debate your side, and then it was voted on by all the members asking who won the debate.The problem was that people were voting on subjective ideological premises, and not who was the better debator. Indeed, it is quesitonable whether half the time the debates were even read.If the debate was about how abortion is bad, if most people were for the pro-choice movement, it didn't matter if a 3rd grader looked like they were debating versus a PhD laurette. The other person would lose simply on the grounds that they liked abortion or hated abortion. It was ridiculous. It pissed me off so much that I ended up leaving and coming here.Before my exodus I brought this up to the creators and they actually took it to heart and have completely revamped their entire forum. It now is a forum similar to this one.

---

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams

Abusive?You were out of line in your posts to me, don't act stupid and innocent. I defended myself and my kids, how is that abusive? You were the one who never replied back, even though you instigated it, which showed me you are weak and a troll - I'm guessing Admin saw that as well. That's not what she told me. - Oni

I have never seen any rating, anywhere that was objective. When I was back in the Army, I received ratings semi annually or whenever a new supervisor came in. It seemed that if I got along with the supervisor I got high ratings but if I did not get along well with a supervisor I got low ratings even tho I did the same amount and quality of work. Ratings are going to be subjective since humans, who are sujective beings are doing the ratings.

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

I'm a hopeless optimist when it comes to believing I'll be fairly evaluated for my work, but here's a true and very recent story. Upheavals in the computer industry drove a reorganization at my company about three years ago that found me reporting to a new boss. I worked like crazy the first year to create a good impression. lots of unpaid overtime, and received an average assessment. The second year I slowed way down figuring it wasn't going to make any difference (in essence, I worked a normal week most weeks) and got a much better assessment. And as far as I know, my boss likes me and I like her. Go figure.I stopped trying to make sense of this stuff a long time ago. Annual performance assessments represent our best attempt at putting a rational, objective structure onto an inherently (in many fields) subjective process.--Percy

I got my low rating for daring to argue with a religious retard who is also an administrator here. Every biblical contradiction I quoted was dismissed as "a song", "an allegory", and so on.The highlight of the thread was where retardo argued that it was "righteous" for a person (Lot) to offer his two daughters to a mob for the purposes of gang-rape!There's no reasoning with these idiots.

I'm not aware of any "religious retard" who is an administrator here. This is a rude and demeaning example of name calling. Mental retardation is a real and serious medical issue not a joke to be made about anyone you wish to portray as "stupid."Please rephrase your post.

Aren't you?

I will ask one more time, Please rephrase your post or a 24 hour suspension will be forthcoming for infraction of Forum Guidelines 1 and 10.

The position: that a man could be considered by "god" as being "righteous" by offering his virginal daughters for the explicit purpose of gang-rape!That's just retarded, in my book. I haven't named the person responsible. Ban me if you like. I won't lose any sleep!Bye.Edited by Blzebub, : typo

Your wish is my command.