4 ms·
> Taking more granular detail into account just isn't done. Where'd you dream up that idea? I operate a restaurant, so I at least have first-hand experience in
by randomdata 2y ago
> Taking more granular detail into account just isn't done.
Where'd you dream up that idea? I operate a restaurant, so I at least have first-hand experience in overseeing barista-like workers, and I don't know how you could possibly ignore such details?
I'm sure I'm not perfect at it. I'm certainly not accurately capturing the butterfly flapping its wings in Africa. But you'd never flat-out ignore the blatantly obvious like shift times.
- lesuorac 2y agoPerhaps we've gone so deep into the thread that you've forgotten how we got here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41983561 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41983561 Perhaps with a statement like "But you'd never flat-out ignore the blatantly obvious like shift times." then you understand why people don't like stack ranking because yes people do ignore blatantly obvious things.
- randomdata 2y agoNot forgotten, but not particularly relevant. The context we followed only inherited the athletics analogy and how it parallels with baristas. Sometimes it is necessary to ignore the blatantly obvious. You can't meaningfully alter the ranking of a sports team because their star player was out with a broken leg. You have to accept the circumstances for what they are. But I'm not sure that translates to something like shift times which are fundamental to the game.