This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Arcticocean (talk | contribs) at 13:47, 24 November 2013 (→Scoring: r). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 13:47, 24 November 2013 by Arcticocean (talk | contribs) (→Scoring: r)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Awaiting your guide
Eagerly awaiting your guide, Collect. (But now I have to look at all the other guides to find out who the perp is.) --71.163.153.146 (talk) 23:16, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
Scoring
You say you are going to evaluate answers in an "impartial manner" and assign values "from 0 to 5 for each answer … In several cases the aim of the question is to get a feeling for the Wikianschauung of the candidate". Could you therefore explain how my seven answers together returned a score of one? AGK 12:58, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
- I noted that accusing a teacher of lying or misrepresentation in the posing of an essay question rarely achieves any grade at all. You did so, and so your grade reflects the demeanor you presented. I hold no animus of any kind towards you at all, but when a person acts as you did in "answering" a question, they ain't gonna love their grade. Cheers.
- You are not a teacher; we are equals. You should not have expected me not to correct what I considered a misunderstanding in the question: that one arbitrator's private approach does not mean the whole committee ignored the workshop and evidence pages. In your question, you wrongly implied we did. You will vote however you like, and I am frankly not interested in changing your mind, but you should at least be honest about why you are opposing me. At the moment, you are not. I will say nothing more on the matter. Regards, AGK 13:47, 24 November 2013 (UTC)