So I'm watching an ESPN panel rant about the gross injustices done unto various "bubble" teams as the NCAA Men's Basketball tourney brackets form.
What I am noticing is that they have different standards for different categories.
Teams that they think should not be in are judged by raw # of losses during their season.
Teams that they think belong in the tourney are judged by something called "RPI" (which might have something to do with taxes, fees and Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price or something).
In sitting through various "dialogues" and "listening processes" favored by Episcopalians (and Anglicanism's present Archbishop of Canterbury), I've experienced the same game of free-floating apples and oranges.
When one comes to the table with developed arguments, research or statistics, they are ruled out of order as not relevant to feelings and relationships.
When one comes to the table with intuition, impressions or experiences, these are ruled out of order as "personal issues," not relevant to "our common mission."
At least Dick Vitale on ESPN is funny. Most "dialogue facilitators" are bores.