alphacyberranger@sh.itjust.works to LinkedinLunatics@sh.itjust.worksEnglish · 3 days agoAverage LinkedIn usersh.itjust.worksimagemessage-square45fedilinkarrow-up11arrow-down10
arrow-up11arrow-down1imageAverage LinkedIn usersh.itjust.worksalphacyberranger@sh.itjust.works to LinkedinLunatics@sh.itjust.worksEnglish · 3 days agomessage-square45fedilink
minus-squareIlovethebomb@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up0·3 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-squareunexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkarrow-up0·edit-23 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.
minus-squaregalanthus@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up0·3 days agoThat’s a great system, keeps everyone happy.
minus-squareBrave Little Hitachi Wand@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·3 days agoI mean… He didn’t even read the percentile number correctly. How do you get an off by one error reading a number
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.
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.
That’s a great system, keeps everyone happy.
I mean… He didn’t even read the percentile number correctly. How do you get an off by one error reading a number