Not sure why this is getting downvoted. Stack ranking is the laziest and, other than perhaps random sampling, the most idiotic way to "cull" a class. The only r

Not sure why this is getting downvoted. Stack ranking is the laziest and, other than perhaps random sampling, the most idiotic way to "cull" a class. The only reason people are okay with it is the cycle of abuse: "I had to suffer through this, so, by golly, the next generation will have to as well!" You also see this in software engineering hiring processes ("well, if I had to whiteboard memoization, so will the new kids!"). The counter-example is trivial: suppose you have ten "Einsteins" in your class, but due to your dumb-ass stack ranked curve, you "cut" 4 of them. Congratulations, you just set back human progress 300 years. For the record, UCLA was equally-idiotic when it came to grading. Technically, getting an A+ (4.3) was possible, but they were virtually NEVER given out. Why? Who the fuck knows -- I asked multiple times what I could have done better. I only ever got a handful of A+'es (and basically had straight A's). As an aside, I wish I could nuke the entire educational system. It's corrupted by lazy and complacent professors (that clearly suck at their job: see the reproducibility crisis, p-hacking, etc.), a veritable swamp of administrators (syphoning six-figure salaries across the board), and bloated sports budgets. All while issuing unforgivable loans to record-high numbers of students.