Growing up, I’ve seen a lot of teachers, critics, people online and in real life alike never give the score 10/10 because “nothing is perfect”, as if they took more than three seconds to share this asinine remark. A score is a human construct, it is as arbritary as the letters in the alphabet. Since humans are flawed, it is evident that any system that we create will never be perfect and could always improve. As such, the scoring system, ranging from purely bad (0), and perfect (10) intrinsinctely “knows” its own limits. In other words, giving a 10 means “as close to perfection as possible”, not theorically perfect because nothing is! It’s self-evident. That also means that 0 doesn’t mean “completely devoid of any possible traits”, but “as close to a dark hole of good character traits”. And no, not everyone already agrees with this, just take a look online. The moment you give a 10, people will say “well it has flaws”. No shit. Do you know the reason we never put salt and pepper in any ingredients list? Because, while it is an ingredient, it is self-evident that ANY recipe ever would need some. And anyway, if you refuse to give a 10 and stop at 9, it means that your 9 is the new marker for perfection. You merely shifted the scoring from 0 to 9. Though, I’m not arguing that we should see more 10s. I’m simply stating that people will avoid giving 10 (or 100) for some obscure reasons.
Comments
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
I give your reasoning here a one out of ten. I’d give it a zero, but nothing is totally imperfect.
i mean, they are correct. nothing is perfect. but also, nothing is imperfect. 1/10.
Agreed, although this probably isn’t unpopular. I can however see not giving 100% when something falls short of explicit criteria. Similarly, if something hits all criteria, then that deserves 100%. Without some objective standard, people can give whatever they want based on their own subjective expectations.
I believe that our perception of this question is strongly flawed by schooling. In school typically every 10% is a letter grade. That means A 90+, B is 80-90, C 70-80, D 60-70, and F 60 or less. Basically we have over a decade of life that anything less than a 6 is a total failure, and as such our expectations for scoring really only allows the use of 6-10 otherwise, total failure.
The better system for grading would be to use the entire scale to more accurately judge people. 5-6 is average work, and each point above or below that becomes exceeding more rare, with 10s and 0s being extremely rare and exceptional displays of close to perfection, or completely devoid of any use on the topic.
I would agree with you in the current system 100% should be more common than currently given, but in a perfect world, we would use more of the scale and it would not have to be.
In most cases of critical evaluation, numeric scales end up being a mistake. They imply a level of precision that is not possible, and have unintended consequences like a 10/10 being interpreted as “perfect.” Beyond this, the numerical scale makes it harder to compare ratings across reviewers in a large part because the scores are so individualized; for example, some reviewers may see a 5/10 as average while others may see 7/10 as average.
In most cases a qualitative scale makes more sense. Using descriptive terms like terrible, poor, mediocre, average, good, great, and exceptional will result in greater understanding. If you want, you can add scores halfway between these terms to allow people more freedom; but rarely is more precision necessary or valuable.
I mean, if someone called themselves a 10/10, I’m not hanging around them ☠️
Nobodies a 10/10 and if they believe so, then probably have issues 💀
I will never rate something 10/10 because that suggests there’s something perfect, the only time anyone is rating anything 10/10 is when it becomes their hyperfixation and they have an obsession, it’s delusion not rational lines of thinking
My biggest problem is how people expect 10/10 to mean “meets expectations”. No my trip to the grocery store was not a 10/10. My service at uber was not a 5 star, but I have to give them that otherwise uber will think something is wrong.
Then you will absolutely hate the French system where 19 out of 20 is the best you can do (with some exception)
19 out of 20 – Numberphile
The way I see it, if I cannot tell what I would change its 10.
And I can almost always tell. But not always.