A simple question to you, fellow reader

 Is 36.5/40 good?

Well? What’s your answer?

If you said “Yes, obviously — that’s over 90%!”, you’re not wrong.

Small test. Fewer questions.
Each mark is worth more.
Miss 3 here, and it’s like missing 15 in a 100-mark test.
Scoring 91% in a 40-mark test? That’s precision — you didn’t have much room to mess up.

But… flip the coin.
If it’s a 100-mark test and you still got 91%, that’s consistency — you kept it together over a much longer run.

Now think of it like archery.
Shoot 40 arrows and hit 91%? You miss only 3–4 arrows — impressive accuracy.
Shoot 100 arrows at 91%? You hit 91 targets — more total hits.

Now stretch that to 1000 arrows:
If your accuracy really is 91%, that’s 910 hits.
But if you only shot 40 arrows at 91%… that translates to just 900 hits out of 1000 if we scaled it up.

So which archer is “better”?
The one who almost never misses in a short round, or the one who racks up more total hits over the long haul?

Same percentage.
Two definitions of “better.”                                                                                                                               Precision vs Consistency

That’s why I asked you the question in the first place — not to talk about marks, but to show you how most arguments work.
Two sides. Two truths. Both logical.
The disagreement isn’t about the facts — it’s about what we decide matters most.

So… next time you’re in a debate, ask yourself:
Are you fighting for the truth?
Or just your truth?

---