alphacyberranger@sh.itjust.works to LinkedinLunatics@sh.itjust.worksEnglish · 2 days agoAverage LinkedIn usersh.itjust.worksexternal-linkmessage-square48fedilinkarrow-up1453arrow-down15
arrow-up1448arrow-down1external-linkAverage LinkedIn usersh.itjust.worksalphacyberranger@sh.itjust.works to LinkedinLunatics@sh.itjust.worksEnglish · 2 days agomessage-square48fedilink
minus-squareIlovethebomb@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up29arrow-down1·2 days agoTo be somewhat fair, that is a very confusing way to present a score worse than 50%. Who are precisely the people we need to simplify things for.
minus-squareBrave Little Hitachi Wand@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up17·2 days agoI mean… He didn’t even read the percentile number correctly. How do you get an off by one error reading a number
minus-squaregalanthus@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up13·2 days agoThat’s a great system, keeps everyone happy.
minus-squareunexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkarrow-up3·edit-22 days agoThe concept of IQ tests is always under fire (for good and bad reasons) so showing results in this way might keep the people in the bottom 50% from getting mad.
To be somewhat fair, that is a very confusing way to present a score worse than 50%.
Who are precisely the people we need to simplify things for.
I mean… He didn’t even read the percentile number correctly. How do you get an off by one error reading a number
That’s a great system, keeps everyone happy.
The concept of IQ tests is always under fire (for good and bad reasons) so showing results in this way might keep the people in the bottom 50% from getting mad.