I hear you. But 'writing is subjective' also logically means 'there is no right or wrong'. Or at least that Curator's idea of right and wrong, is no more valid than Editor's idea of right or wrong, assuming that they're both singing from the same song sheet.

And if 90 nommers are struggling to align their criteria with Medium Curation's, how does the system work with 1000?

I used to be an examiner for Cambridge 'English as a Foreign Language' exams. Each year we had to go in for 'standardisation sessions', where we would sit and watch videos of oral exams, mark them according to the criteria we were given, and then compare our grades against the 'official', 'correct' mark.

It was hard work, and often hard for the moderator to justify the grades. There too much 'because that's what it says here' for my liking. One of the problems was that we were based in Spain. Students with an awful accent or grammatical structures transferred directly from Spanish made perfect sense to us, because we were so used to it. But when we watched a video with students from China, we couldn't understand a word. We were giving Spanish-speakers a 4 and the Chinese-speakers a 2, when the official version was 3 for everyone. Ultimately no one was right: intelligible to whom? In what context? Who is their interlocutor?

By all of which I guess I mean: good luck, because it's an impossible task to get right to everyone's (or even a narrow majority's) satisfaction.

But such is life.

And thanks again for your engagement on these issues, which as you know, is very important to all of us. And if you read anything by me bitching about the whole thing, please don't take it personally - we all have a lot of stuff to get off our chests.

Still, Scribe and Illumination, they would seriously be on my naughty step...