Slashdot Mirror
Customer Feedback Surveys Could Be Considered Harmful (easydns.org)
Longtime Slashdot reader Stunt Pope writes: Customer Feedback surveys are now near-ubiquitous, subjecting us all to near-Black Mirror-esque pursuit to "rate your experience" for everything from going to the bank to ordering a pizza. Thanks to The Curse of Goodhart's Law, all of these surveys are beyond useless and even damaging. Mark Jeftovic writes in a blog post: "The shop/hire-rate-reward feedback loop has become baked-in to some systems. Many live marketplaces incorporate these feedback transactions into ratings, which then become a score which then impacts future prospects of whomever is being rated. And that's where the trouble starts. There is a point where this stops being useful and the knock-on effects of a ratings system predicated on feedback results becomes counter-productive. That point is when the ratings become targets. When a company decrees 'All customer feedback ratings must score a minimum of X, or else...' the company has just commenced the process of invalidating and corrupting all useful information to be gleaned from that feedback/survey process. A label which captures this concept is 'Goodhart's Law' -- after economist Charles Goodhart, who posited in essence that 'when a measure becomes a target, it becomes useless.'"
How would you rate the quality of this story?
[ ] Ehh, good enough.
[ ] Could have been better, I guess.
" A label which captures this concept is 'Goodhart's Law' -- after economist Charles Goodhart, who posited in essence that 'when a measure becomes a target, it becomes useless.'"
I've seen a similar effect in places where I've worked. A poorly defined metric that is used to rate employee performance will suddenly become the primary focus of the job, instead of actually doing the job.
Because if you don't vote 10/10 then the retaliatory customer rating will be 0/10 and you won't be able to get and Uber anyone.
Maybe they dangle the prize in front of your face and meanwhile extract as much data about you and your habits as they can. This way your life may be complicated by too much information. But sometimes they actually DO show you something that you can actually use. On the dark side, they can mistakenly fire people who don't deserve it though ratings. Or they can figure out how to further thin out employees.
Would you rate this story a second time if we gave you a 5% off coupon?
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Due to the growing abusiveness or corporations, invasions of privacy, and wide spread deceit, I have decided to follow the principles that many corporations expose and purposefully lie in feedback to companies I dislike. They want quality consulting services, well, the fuckers can bloody well pay for them, nothing is for free according to them, for free, they just get lies. Turnabout is fair play after all, lie to me, well I'll lie to you ;) (only for poorly behaved corporations, which seems to be the majority, especially multi-nationals).
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
An experience at a local biz in town with a customer service rep... Was told that anything less than 5 out of 5 on his customer review is considered a bad review, and he all but begged me to give him 5-stars.
He was so overly friendly it was past creepy. I felt conflicted: he did a good job, but I felt I was rating for his sake, not to give an honest assessment of how well I was served by him.
And as a person filling out surveys who knows (just a little) about math and statistics, I think of ratings on a bell curve. On a 1-10 scale almost nothing is actually a 1 or a 10. On that scale I would rate a 5 as average service and give a 7 or 8 to what I think is well above average service, 9 would be excellent service. You would only get a 10 if there was no possible way to do any better under any circumstances and you completely exceeded all of my expectations. Unfortunately people get dinged if they don't get all 10s. Sucks to be you if I have to fill out your survey.
It's no surprise to know that targets can be gamed, and that performance metrics can be poorly implemented. But this is a false dichotomy: the choice is not between poorly implemented metrics/targets and no metrics/targets. There's also the option of implementing metrics/targets well. Not perfectly: what is, in this life? But certainly possible to implement them well -- and it would be damaging for the organisation not to do so. And if the behaviours and mindsets of the organisation are broken in the first place, then an absence of metrics/targets can be just as disastrous as poorly implemented metrics/targets -- and what's really needed is effort to work on the underlying issues.
I don't generally fill out surveys. When I do, though, I am as honest as they let me be. Sometimes, the pre-provided answers don't conform to my true feelings or are not applicable.
I prefer the freeform surveys where I can state exactly what I like and don't like.
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
I follow Joshua's advice and rarely, if ever, fill out the "customer feedback survey".
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
It's supposed to demoralize the front-line people. It's supposed to make them hate every second with the customers. This isn't a big revelation. It's applied psychology being used for anti-social ends.
The ends which state that time is money.
For every second you're not selling, you're costing someone money. For every second you're not adding value to that sale, you're costing someone money. For every second you're spending getting to know that other human, you're wasting someone else's money. That's how retail works now. How's it's been working for the past 15 years or so when those got first introduced. It was never about getting someone to better themselves. It was always about manipulation.
I am as honest as they let me be.
You are a horrible person. Do you realize that by rating a good, but not fantastic, interaction as only 4/5, you are jeopardizing someone's career?
Because if you don't vote 10/10 then the retaliatory customer rating will be 0/10
I don't know how Uber works (I use Lyft) but the way Airbnb works is neither party can see the other's rating until both have posted. So using the rating system to retaliate doesn't work.
Does that mean 5% less ads on the page?
Hummmm... no deal!
Just rate them double-plus good! Then both you and their big brother will be non-sad happy!
Will this work for you? ;)
On a scale of 1 to 10, please rate to the nearest ten-thousandth place, EXACTLY how you felt about your service today:
1. Your Service reps handshake: 7.67565
The reps hand placement was not in perfect alignment with mine, and I detected a slight amount of clamminess on the skin...
2. The quality of the tires you received: 3.14159
The tires were very round, but the font face of the sidewall was less than ideal for viewing at high speeds.
*fewer
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
I've put some thought into metrics for programmers / software jobs and have come up with damn little that's useful *if the programmers know what the metrics are*. If management looks at different metrics each month or quarter, and nobody knows ahead of time what they'll be looking at, you might get some semi-useful numbers. The metric doesn't become the goal when you don't know what the metrics is.
Whenever the people doing the work know what the metric is, and have motivation to increase it, most focus more increasing the metric than doing the job well, in my experience. Obviously *some* jobs can be measured with a simple number, though even most of those fail to capture quality of work, when you just measure quantity. If you have some ideas that you've seen work long term I'd love to hear about it.
In software programming, my most productive work often involves deleting superfluous and redundant code, and deleting code that's based on assumptions, in order to make it work in more general cases. That makes the code more useful, faster, more maintainable, and most importantly more reliable - it's impossible to have bugs in code that isn't there. Bso anyway that's my *most* productive work, for the time spent. (Deleting is fast.) Some morons have tried to measure programmer productivity by "lines of code added". Well that's exactly wrong. It rates the most productive work as having negative productivity. Other measurements are slightly better in that they don't measure the exact OPPOSITE of what they are supposed to measure, but none I've seen is particularly useful.
but give them fake info
CowboyNeal thanks us all for the discounts he gets.
Have gnu, will travel.
Start trying to fill it out with the salesperson's info, they tend to give up quickly after that.
Pedantry. 0/5
Pretty easy to see the rating if you watch them enter it.
Nope. Rusty Shackelford.
Precision and clarity. 5/5.
Thank You for your thoughtful response. Please take 5 minutes and complete a free survey regarding your recent Slashdot posting experience!
1. On a scale of 1 to 9.99, 10 being the best, how would rate the grammatical content of that post you replied too?
2. On a scale of noon to midnight how would you rate the timeliness of the post?
3. On a scale from A to Z, how was the speling?
For completing this *FRee survey, you get a sticker!
and 1060 west addison as your address
If it's a phone number based system, just give them Jenny's phone number.
I dunno. Take a call centre. ASA (average speed of answer) is a common and important metric. Organisations will often have a target or SLA for their ASA, and this is something customers really care about. It's driven by a range of factors: how call centre operatives handle calls, matching of demand and supply, actions to reduce demand such as self-service (eg online) or bots to answer, etc etc. I can't see how a call centre could manage itself effectively without having both an ASA target for the centre as a whole and for individual operators.
Or in another field: mortality rates for surgeons. Distinguishing case-mix and other effects from surgical competence effects is very very hard -- but that doesn't mean we can afford to stop trying, or stop looking at these numbers.
How do I get honest feedback? I mean, I'm actively developing software, and adding new features. I would love to be told "most of your customers want X before Y" (or most of your on-the-fence non-customers). That seems to be a win-win for everyone (except those minority who want Y, but that would be true of any system that accurately measured).
Your ad here. Ask me how!
And as a person filling out surveys who knows (just a little) about math and statistics, I think of ratings on a bell curve. On a 1-10 scale almost nothing is actually a 1 or a 10. On that scale I would rate a 5 as average service and give a 7 or 8 to what I think is well above average service, 9 would be excellent service. You would only get a 10 if there was no possible way to do any better under any circumstances and you completely exceeded all of my expectations. Unfortunately people get dinged if they don't get all 10s. Sucks to be you if I have to fill out your survey.
I do the same. Though I have learned to schew the scale up so average is 6 or 7, because otherwise all hell breaks lose when I rate people or services. I still never give 10s since those are reserved for truly outstanding service, and those will NEVER come from companies that ask you to rate them.. Asking to be rated in fact automatically pulls you down a rank :D
> Or in another field: mortality rates for surgeons.
So the most reliable, and most obvious way for a doctor to increase their rating is to try to avoid treating patients the who are in poor health - exactly the opposite of what we want doctors to do. A doctor who aims to reduce their mortality rate should if spend their time with althletes and college students, maybe handing out steroids and stimulants. Again, if the doctor doesn't *know* anyone is looking at the mortality rate of patients, it can be a very crude but marginally useful number. As soon as you tie doctor pay to mortality rates, you're paying them to avoid sick people.
I worked somewhere that metricked lines of code. Our "top coder" put all arguments on their own line, added lots of blank or stupid comments and did everything the hard verbose way. Had to look at that shit for years afterward.
Man, you really need that seminar!
I don't suppose that place managed to become, and remain, a large company, given their idiocy? Of so I'd love to know the name, so I can avoid them. I wouldn't want to bother interviewing there, and it would probably be best to avoid buying their products if their coders are rewarded for creating the biggest pile of garbage.
If you want to reward someone for doing a good job, you can tell a manager (look for someone walking around the store who looks like a manager), or go to the store's "Customer Service" department, and tell them. Be specific as to how that person was helpful.
Once in a busy pre-Christmas shopping season, a store employee went out of his way to help me. I told a manager, who was walking around the store, how much that employee had helped me. About 1/2 later, the employee rushed up to me all happy. He thanked me for telling the manager how helpful he had been. He said that because of what I'd said, he'd gotten a star (whatever that is) and a bonus.
I think it's also important to consider that satisfaction surveys tend to suffer from a sort of selection bias. You're only getting feedback from people who feel compelled to give feedback. In my personal experience you'll get:
- Sometimes people who are angry
- Occasional people who are extremely pleased
- Often people who have excessive esteem of their own opinions**
- Rarely people who just want to give helpful feedback
I'm not pointing this out to necessarily disparage these groups or say that their opinions aren't valid, but it's important to understand you're unlikely to get a true random sampling.
**I know someone is going to take issue with my third item, "people who have excessive esteem of their own opinions", so I'll try to explain what I mean by that. Obviously people's opinions are important, or you wouldn't be asking for feedback. And yes, everyone values their opinions more than others'. However, there are some people who... you read their online review, and you can tell that they believe their review will impress everyone and settle all disputes. Like you'll read a negative Yelp review, and the reviewer isn't just saying, "I had an bad experience," or "I didn't like it," but something more like, "This place is simply objectively terrible and though I see other people saying that they like the place, they're all wrong and stupid and not worth listening to." You can almost imagine that they've finished writing the review, leaned back in their chair, and thought, "Well that waiter crossed the wrong person. I expect they'll go out of business any day now."
So my
I also once read that customer satisfaction surveys are, in general, only answered by people who were on the extreme ends of the customer satisfaction ratings; that is, most of the time the only people who bother with a survey are those who had a really awesome or a really bad experience. The experience left them emotionally charged, and they feel the need to share/vent, and the survey gives them that opportunity. The average customer, on the other hand, doesn't have this emotional need and so - when offered an opportunity to rate their experience, gives the whole thing a pass and - if forced into it - tend to give wishy-washy middle-of-the-road answers (e.g., all 5 out of 10s) just so they don't have to think about it.
I imagine it is also easier to be on the receiving end of a "terrible experience" than an awesome one too, which only further biases the reviews. I mean, as a customer I can imagine a dozen ways in which a cashier could piss me off, but have a hard time thinking up a way that cashier could make me EXCITED about paying for my groceries). So the end result is very biased against the person getting reviewed, because most of the people who bother to respond to the reviews are those who had a bad experience. If they forced /all/ customers to take the survey and somehow ensured their honesty, you might get a better overview of how the employee is performing, but by leaving it up to the customer the employer is getting a very unbalanced response.
Not to mention I never know how to answer those because I never know what is considered "average". Is a 5/10 average or do I have to base it on the US grading system, where 7/10 is "average"?
I see a lot of pressure to make sure all the numbers are maxed out on the survey, or that item X be given top marks, etc. I bought a car once, over a decade ago, where the salesperson was intent on telling me that box 5 on the survey I was going to get in a couple weeks had to be given a 10 rating, or else things would go very badly for the dealership. It was sort of hard to tell if the home offices do punish the groups or employees that don't get top ratings, or if there is more of a local push to make sure they end up better rated than the other branches. (and for auto sales that's a dog-eat-dog competitive market, even at the same dealership they're often backstabbing each other)
You need to approve my cute kitten videos before I mod your stuff.
I work in the auto industry. Consider all manufacturer surveys on a logarithmic scale. On a 1 through 10 rating system with 1 being the lowest and 10 being the highest, most dealership operators and manufacturers consider 9 a failing grade for the salesperson. Yes, you read that right. A survey filled out with 9's all the way down will get most salespeople called on the carpet. And if you average a 90% rating for the month you may not work there the next month.
Many salespeople's living wage is ties to bonuses that come from customer satisfaction ratings. You get paid one amount for selling a car. You get paid a higher amount if your average customer satisfaction for the month (or sometimes a 3 month rolling average) is above a certain very high number (like 97%.) Some dealerships tie all performance bonuses to high customer satisfaction scores, easily halving the pay of the salesperson if they get one survey with low scores.
For instance, as a salesperson I have had one customer who scored a survey in the 85% range and due to the circumstances of that month, it cost me over $3500 in lost bonuses. This is not an isolated instance. It happens routinely at dealerships all over the country.
The first time I heard from a manufacturer's rep that customer satisfaction ratings are directly related to not only future sales for the marque but also current resale value I knew it was a sham.
When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
Had the same pressure from an Audi salesman a few years ago. Told me I had to rate him a 10.
Well, I didn't because he gave me the usual car salesman sleazy misinformation/ scam dog and pony show as all car salesman are trained to do.
He was pissed.
Last car I bought was a Tesla. No scams. No pressure. Just helped me pick out the options. Best car buying experience ever. (No survey)
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
I always give service people a 10 (unless the service really sucked).
They have shitty jobs and the ratings are just another stick to make their lives miserable. I won't play that game. Hopefully they can get a better job some day.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
I do third to final tier support. My ratings from customers and lower tier support is abysmal because most of the time, I have to say "Nope! Can'tWon't do that." Lost a promotion because of the score as well, so it cost me around $15K.
My favorite rant from someone that said I was "stupid" because I can't configure a F5 to act as a master/master SMB share. Oh, I could get them something like SMB with HA, but not for the incremental price (about $4 a month) they were looking for.
I am actively seeking other employment, for several reasons. The biggest is the 24x7x365 insistence of being on call and less than 5 minutes from being able to spring into action and fixing things. Hell, I can't go to the store and buy skittles without breaking that SLA. If they want a 24 hour support staff, they can damned well hire to staff for 3 shifts.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
I don't think these surveys are worth crap. The companies that rely on them to rate employees have HR policies that suck. I usually just ignore the pleas from "anonymous data collectors" about my visit to see my doctor, or the pizza order (really!). When an employee implores me to rate my visit (for which she is being held responsible) highly, in what might be a personalized way, I just rate the "experience" at 10's from start to finish unless they performed some egregious bit of malpractice on me or my car. It's like tossing a fiver into the hat of a street musician. He needs it and it costs nothing to help him out. I'm hoping that after seeing a few of these the companies will stop asking for my meaningless "feedback". Otherwise, I will continue (with little enthusiasm or optimism) to try to improve the quality of life for those who depend on 10's.
Natural adaptive human behavior will always have humans finding ways to game systems. Static simple systems can not compete with a dynamic complex human (not just smart, but fools are also ingenious.)
WellsFargo just had a huge huge problem with their management--- remember? they were nuts about metrics and linked incentives which ended up in a massive fraud that should have people leaving that bank in groves... But if their big part in the housing collapse didn't get their suckers to quit I am not sure what else would.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
"it cost me over $3500 in lost bonuses."
That's part of the problem. Bonuses, by its very definition, can't be lost, only earned.
So the most reliable, and most obvious way for a doctor to increase their rating is to try to avoid treating patients the who are in poor health - exactly the opposite of what we want doctors to do.
shilly addressed this point in the parent post. Crudely looking at success rates, and over-incentivising them is bad. Not collecting the data because it is liable to misinterpretation is not the solution, however. There are huge benefits in clinical outcomes available by using these metrics sensibly; even some counterintuitive things like closing some regional units - because they saw the trickier cases too rarely to keep their clinical skills up to date.
Many years ago, I participated in a focus group for a marketting company (rating some new ads for Pepsi). They asked us to rate things from -5 to +5. It was quickly apparent that most people in the group didn't understand negative numbers, so rated from 0-5. I am certain that, when they presented the numbers to their client, they gave them in a range of 0-10 and were able to say that all of the scores were broadly positive.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Same here, though for a subtly different reason. If you rate everything 1, then it's easy to discount (you're just difficult to please). If you rate the people 10 but everything that's part of the institutional structure 1-3 then they get a data point of someone who is using the full range of the rating system and thinks that everyone except the easily-firable staff is dangerously incompetent.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
You see it a lot of places other than consumer ratings. For instance, whisky is commonly rated on a 0-100 scale, where 70 or below is considered "shit, not worth buying". Same thing with ratings in game magazines, where 70% is "crap" or "only for really dedicated fans".
And Ebay reviews. Every single time I buy something from China, I get a bunch of messages thanking me for shopping with them, and expressing an expectation that I will give them a perfect 5-star review, for nothing more than shipping me the item I bought.
Everything gets skewed to the high end of the range, so effectively you're only using half or even just a third of the actual scale.
If I had my way, we would all move to a simpler system, a 4-point scale at the very most, with a mandatory paragraph to elaborate on your rating:
0 stars for absolute shit
1 star for bad
2 stars for just OK
3 stars for good
4 stars for great
But unfortunately, that's A) far too simple for the numbers-obsessed sadcases who insist on rating everything on strict numbers, so they can go "but this is 3 more better than that other one" without having to think for themselves, and B) takes too much effort for the lazy fucks who inhabit this world and can't be arsed to write even a single cohesive paragraph about why they like/dislike a certain thing.
Eat the rich.
I usually give a negative feedback about obnoxious, intrusive customer feedback demands.
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
$3500? That's more than I ever earned per month. From where I'm standing you're in a position of luxury.
Just save some money up when you do get your bonus and shrug your shoulders when you don't.
Except if your salary is so low, the salary + bonus is the actual realistic baseline, and bonuses lost are actually penalties incurred.
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
It's hardly a career if 95% performance means losing it. They are better off moving to greener pastures.
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Every system is flawed in one form or another. Let's give National Socialism one more try.
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
The only way to fix this system "from outside" is to break it thoroughly.
You're shifting the blame on the victim. It's not your or the driver's fault that the manager decided 90% rating is the minimum. It's the manager's. And the only way to stop the scoundrel is to stop the money flow up stream.
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Most people where I live will know that from their schooldays a 5 would be a fail, a 6 just passable 7 was average and 8 was good. 9 outstanding and 10 perfect. So people will tend to be in the 7 range as average. The thing is with one question service is that you do not have any way of knowing what my or what your average is. There is no baseline.
To get around this, you can ask what you expect it to be and compare it to what you think it really was. You expect a 5 and you give a 7. Wow. I expect a 9 and give an 8. Improvement is needed.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Whenever the people doing the work know what the metric is, and have motivation to increase it, most focus more increasing the metric than doing the job well, in my experience.
If increasing the metric does not result in the job being done better, then you have the wrong metric (or, at least, a metric that you should not be using to evaluate the employee. One company I worked for had a phrase they imprinted on certain tools they gave managers, "What does not get measured does not get done."
Customer satisfaction is a terrible metric for which to hold employees accountable because there are too many variables which the customer facing employee cannot control. I have interacted with a company which gives out these surveys. I always give them poor ratings while emphasizing in my comments that the employees I dealt with went above and beyond to help me, but my experience interacting with customer support for that company had been awful because of the tools company management had given those employees to work with.
Companies should seek to have high customer satisfaction, but they need to find ways to measure what results in good customer satisfaction and measure their employees against that.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
I think that we all instinctively understand this but this is the first time I have seen it codified in such a way.
I have noticed how some people use what car someone drives or the cost of someone's home as an indicator of their financial status but then there are people who will buy outrageously expensive cars while they live with their parents or people who buy expensive houses but don't have the financial means to buy enough food.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
And as a person filling out surveys who knows (just a little) about math and statistics, I think of ratings on a bell curve. On a 1-10 scale almost nothing is actually a 1 or a 10. On that scale I would rate a 5 as average service and give a 7 or 8 to what I think is well above average service, 9 would be excellent service. You would only get a 10 if there was no possible way to do any better under any circumstances and you completely exceeded all of my expectations. Unfortunately people get dinged if they don't get all 10s. Sucks to be you if I have to fill out your survey.
My thoughts exactly. I sometimes piss people off on upwork because I give feedback as it should be. 3 is average, 4 is above average, and 5 is "there is no way to do any better at exceeding my expectations". And that's what 5 is - "exceeds expectations". If you do exactly the job that I paid you to do in the timeframe specified then welcome to "3" - you did what is expected. It's unfortunate that many people expect to get a "I exceeded your expectations" reward for not exceeding my expectations.
Do you have ESP?
Most of these places will look you up by phone number if you tell them you don't have the card with you.
The local area code plus "867-5309" has worked at any place I've ever been. (From the "Jenny" song, from those of us who wouldn't remember it.) And I'm apparently not the only one who knows this. According to my store receipt, Jenny spent over $30,000 at my local grocery store last year.
To fight the war on terror, stop being afraid.
In some cases, there are only two grades : the maximum score and less than the maximum. The scale is a decoy.
You know, a scale than runs from -5 to 5, with 0 being neutral, actually makes a lot more sense than the 0 to 10 scale. Shame people don't understand negative numbers, because I'd like that one to catch on.
The Quirkz Handbook of Self-Improvement for People Who Are Already Pretty Okay
I take a page from the President, only a fool pays taxes.
It would really help if you looked up terms you're unfamiliar with, such as casemix. It would have saved you the bother of typing all that.
Thank you for that. Glad that someone else here knows this stuff.
This phenomenon is a corollary of teaching to the test, where teachers and schools are criticized for only teaching things that will appear on a standardized test. Of course, this is nonsense. If a topic is important enough to be taught, it is also important enough to be (with non-trivial probability) on the test. Or said differently, if it's not important enough to be on the test, why are you teaching it? In reality, if it's important enough to be on the test, it should be taught. Therefore, all teachers should teach to a test that contains questions about all relevant topics. Likewise, customer rating subjects should reflect actual performance criteria. If it's not on the customer satisfaction survey, it is not important on the job, and vice versa. The problem here is actually that the scoring scheme is bizarre and unknown to the test taker/satisfaction survey taker. There is nothing wrong with a well-formed satisfaction survey. The giant fault is with the scoring system and how it is used. Don't throw out the baby and keep the bath water.
"Except if your salary is so low, the salary + bonus is the actual realistic baseline, and bonuses lost are actually penalties incurred."
And that's exactly why I said "that's part of the problem": bonus should never be counted as part of a baseline -because it isn't.
"bonuses lost are actually penalties incurred."
Only by the same logic than me copying a Sony film becomes lost revenue for them.
But that is not your real name! According to a certain someone in my sig, we are pussies if we don't use our real names every time!
That is a good one, I will have to start using it.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
All too many companies will expect a minimum of 90% out of all their employees demonstrating a complete lack of comprehension over basic statistics.
So, what you are saying is that the company expects any person who shows a complete lack of comprehension over basic statistics to score a minimum of 90%.
Perhaps you could use a comma, here are a few for you. ,,,,
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Except going without a major part of your salary is far less optional than going without watching a shitty action flick.
I agree the system is wrong, but as opposed to Sony's claims, it's a fact - not an delusional belief.
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
I find it interesting - it seems you're not so stupid, just supremely full pf yourself and perhaps you need to take your meds.
Ps, the point you've missed is that the defender has to remove *all* of the vulnerabilities, the attacker only has to find *one*. Duplicate code and other forms of poor maintainability mean that the defender is more likely to overlook something in one copy, peer review can't be as as thorough in the allotted time, etc.
This is a very secure program (except in older versions of PHP):
print 'Hello World';
The defender can readily understand the potential behaviors of the program. Greater complexity means greater risk.
That's interesting.
I hope this doesn't come across as negative, but today your posts are even better than they normally are. More clear and focused. If you've been doing something differently lately, you might want to keep doing it.