Please relax - re read the other thread and ones before that or ask r1s2g3 and you will see what you saying is not true. If you want to just remove the top 0.13% that is fine. However to reference correctly my opinions you must abide by the criteria I had specified or it is a misrepresentation of what I was saying. I am not moving the goal posts as you are suggesting. If you want me to find the posts where I said already the top 300 and meta board then I will if you are unable.

See the language again "incessant rants"  I notice a lot of your posts and not just in my direction take this kind of aggressive already dismissive tone. I don't think it is suitable for anyone but especially not someone who I have found to be generally making unreasonable assumptions and unable to provide any grounding for them. These are strawmen like the ones you often accuse me of and sometimes guilty of but I am learning fast. Nobody is suggesting removing the whole boards merits so why say it. Please don't go all irrational on me already.

Now again please relax. If loyce wants to reference my opinions and then provide alternative argument on the data he pulled he should not misrepresent them and rather push the data through the full set of conditions I had been basing my opinion on. Actually they were assumptions and due to something dmdrdmdr pointed out that I had actually not factored in I feel the reductions may be proven not to be as extreme as I had assumed. I may need to revise the average reduction down to around  mid 70s% not in the high 80's. Some more some less of course. A nice comparison chart like r1s2g3 made with original rank and revised rank would be the best way to display it.

I am not afraid to be out by quite some margin (being wrong during a debate is not a big deal if you are willing to change your opinion when required) since as I say only the reality is worth realising.

Now please fairly consider and reread before posting anything else.

@Coolcryptovator

You need to realise pulling data is a great talent and the effort required is commendable and worthy of merit.
However being a moderator requires you to process data and make an optimal and fair decision. These 2 things do not go hand in hand.
I am not at all sure that many here in meta that I have discussed/debated with honestly have that quality.


If we get any new mods especially from the list that I have seen around  I hope that there is lot criteria in place to guide decisions.
The best thing about this board (along with other things) was the fairness of the moderation... and getting more heavy handed or less fair (not properly considering and weighing all information) will be the only thing that will damage what made it great.

Loyce does seem a nice person and honest and even fair (based on his reasoning) but I feel still needs to work on his critical thinking and reasoning process before he will consistently make the optimal and fairest decisions based upon correct analysis of information with regularity.

To be a mod you should be able to produce reasoning to demonstrate most of the opinions you make are optimal.
 
Again this is not aimed at loyce specifically the same can be said of many on the list that I have debated with since finding meta recently.