Do you believe in the grading of humans?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Are there 'low quality' and 'high quality' people or is it just a matter of taste?

Is it a shame that 'good person' and 'bad person' refer only to morality?

― N. (nickdastoor), Sunday, 27 July 2003 11:56 (twenty-two years ago)

there are low quality and high quality people, but is totally subjective. i have no problem with grading people, the person i discuss it with maye well have different criteria and disagree with who i think is high or low quality

im not sure that it does just refer to morality. its more ambiguous than that. like there are subsections of morality, trustworthyness, empathy, forgiveness, patience, , not all these are necessarily moral as such either. a person may be wonderful in all regards, but not forgive the slightest perceived error, this isnt necessarily wrong or even low quality of them though?

i think we grade people on more unabiguously non-moral criteria also, like interestingness, fun, looks, 'wavelength', intelligence. is it ok to consider someone low quality for being dull, stupid, unfunny? yes, i think it is. theres nothing inherently bad about that, as long as we dont think it is objective fact. someone else may think them great

― gareth (gareth), Sunday, 27 July 2003 12:03 (twenty-two years ago)

is it moral to think all people equal? doesnt that suggest a certain lack of engagement with actual real people?

― gareth (gareth), Sunday, 27 July 2003 12:04 (twenty-two years ago)

you can think what you like about ppl, it's the way you treat them that counts

― minna (minna), Sunday, 27 July 2003 12:05 (twenty-two years ago)

so if you think someone is low quality you should probably just avoid them, not go following them around saying "you're low quality"

― minna (minna), Sunday, 27 July 2003 12:06 (twenty-two years ago)

ppl who watch jerry springer and take any of that stuff seriously to thread.

― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Sunday, 27 July 2003 12:06 (twenty-two years ago)

hahaha yes! it should not really be of any consequence if someone is of a low quality

― gareth (gareth), Sunday, 27 July 2003 12:07 (twenty-two years ago)

What's with all the hippies around here lately?

― Pabst Blue Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Sunday, 27 July 2003 14:27 (twenty-two years ago)

you mean grading like beef?

― Bosse-De-Nage (Bosse-De-Nage), Sunday, 27 July 2003 15:47 (twenty-two years ago)

so if you think someone is low quality you should probably just avoid them, not go following them around saying "you're low quality"

DAMMIT there goes the weekend.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Sunday, 27 July 2003 15:55 (twenty-two years ago)

i suppose some people are indisputedly "nicer" than others, but as has been pointed out above - people won't necessarily hang around with the most moral or decent people they know - there are other factors at play : sense of humour, interests, how "fun" they are. i'm guessing a lot of people do demand a certain level of decency/friendliness/morals from those close to them, though: quite a few of my friends have mean/hostile senses of humour which i quite like, but there definitely some actions which would drive me away from them, no matter how "fun" or "funny" they were.

it's interesting, me and a friend(1) met up with another friend(2) of ours recently,: we hadn't seen him in a while. afterwards, i was saying what a top bloke he is - and my friend agreed, but also said that we get on with friend(2) in different ways. friend(1) felt that whenever i think friend(2) is being funny, he just thinks he's being obnoxious. while i find (2)'s wicked sense of humour a plus point - some of his other close friend's see it as a downside - which is why "rating" people is a tricky business.

― weasel diesel (K1l14n), Sunday, 27 July 2003 16:10 (twenty-two years ago)

"i suppose some people are indisputedly "nicer" than others"

(again, there are people who i would see as being 100%-decent-haven't-got-a-bad-bone-in-their-body types, but others would see this niceness as being "phoney" or "self-serving": even when someone is consistently friendly - their motivations will be questioned by some)

― weasel diesel (K1l14n), Sunday, 27 July 2003 16:13 (twenty-two years ago)

minna's so awesome

― Millar (Millar), Sunday, 27 July 2003 16:48 (twenty-two years ago)

i don't think it's about "grading" people, but i do think that you would probably want to hang out with a non-murderer or non-rapist, or non-batterer instead of hanging out with a murderer, rapist, or batterer, right? isn't that just common sense? of course we make distinctions between people. we should.

― Orbit (Orbit), Sunday, 27 July 2003 17:45 (twenty-two years ago)

What's with all the hippies around here lately?

Part of my breeding farm for Soylent Green Smoothies.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Sunday, 27 July 2003 17:49 (twenty-two years ago)

Orbit, I'm not really talking about not hanging out with violent criminals.

I mean like the way you grade, say, cheese. Sure, some people will insist that they like cheez string better than gorgonzola, but it is generally accepted that there is a range of quality there, from trash to top prizewinning cheeses. Maybe cheese isn't the best example. OK, racehorses.

― N. (nickdastoor), Sunday, 27 July 2003 17:59 (twenty-two years ago)

Well, the above racetrack analogy assumes:
1. there is a competition
2. there is an objective criteria for winning the competition.

The cheese analogy assumes:
Completely subjective preference with no consequences as a result of the choice you make; all cheeses are benign

Which means: I'm really not sure what you're asking, then. Pass me a smoothie.

― Orbit (Orbit), Sunday, 27 July 2003 18:07 (twenty-two years ago)

I grade people all the time, into two groups - ones I would and ones I wouldn't (non-gender specific).

― Lara (Lara), Sunday, 27 July 2003 18:43 (twenty-two years ago)

i give this board a B.

― Tad (llamasfur), Sunday, 27 July 2003 18:45 (twenty-two years ago)

Are you grading on a curve?

― Lara (Lara), Sunday, 27 July 2003 18:46 (twenty-two years ago)

Or grading curves?

― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Sunday, 27 July 2003 19:54 (twenty-two years ago)

Lara, would you?

― Ally C (Ally C), Monday, 28 July 2003 17:31 (twenty-two years ago)

In a perfect world, absolutely.

― Lara (Lara), Thursday, 31 July 2003 18:52 (twenty-two years ago)

I thought I was talking to ally at 7:31 PM.

― RJG (RJG), Thursday, 31 July 2003 18:56 (twenty-two years ago)

Is this the beginning of the thing?

― Lara (Lara), Thursday, 31 July 2003 19:02 (twenty-two years ago)

Whenever someone recommends someone else to me as "high quality," I get frightened.

― amateurist (amateurist), Thursday, 31 July 2003 19:03 (twenty-two years ago)

it's happening again.

― RJG (RJG), Thursday, 31 July 2003 19:04 (twenty-two years ago)

Nah, it might be something else.

― Lara (Lara), Thursday, 31 July 2003 19:04 (twenty-two years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.