3 ms·
You've not done a very good job of pseudonymizing. It's clear where you stand, but try in earnest to imagine how we might limit the scope of the candidates' pre
by rexpop 8y ago
You've not done a very good job of pseudonymizing. It's clear where you stand, but try in earnest to imagine how we might limit the scope of the candidates' presentation to, e.g. a 60-plank, 3-dimensional platform (ie pro/con/neutral).
Not saying this exact implementation is ideal, only that it's a more accurate representation of a pseudonymizing solution.
- sokoloff 8y agoIf I want to evaluate a candidate’s record (say as governor of a state), I can’t see how to make that pseudonymous and productive. If you tell me the state and the time, so I can judge whatever criteria I find relevant (job growth, infant mortality, population happiness, housing affordability, or 500 other things), you’ve told me who it is, of course. I’m trying to be charitable; I’m just not able to be creative enough to find how to expansively evaluate track record of relevant experience.