[xXOpkillerXx]

Many people use the typical "difficulty is subjective" line when they can't or don't want to argue further on difficulty. Yes difficulty is subjective, however that doesn't mean it shouldn't have structure. The most common points I see lately are about bpms + patterns (and occasionally stamina/length). This combination has its subjectivity (just like any other basis of difficulty) but it's debatable in terms of what's harder than what. Lower end files are no different: some combinations are harder than others. Fun fact, Etterna uses pretty much that kind of structure, split into categories.

Lets debate this example of yours:

Originally Posted by Precarious

So consider the following scenario. A new file is released, and ten D6/7/8 players all rate it a 52. Ten D2/3/4 players rate it 51, 54, 56, 58, 54, 60, 50, 61, 57, and 57. One might surmise that by quantifiable standards, it must be a 52. All of the more skilled/experienced players determined it to be such, likely by calculating backward from bpm and patterns, and comparing it against their own expectations for such a file. The lower division estimates were all over the place, but averaged to 55.8. I'd argue that assessment is closer, because the file is meant to be representative and demonstrative of their skillsets. Yes, the lower you go, the more gaps there will be in skillsets, and thus the larger the potential for variation and outliers. But difficulty itself is, by everyone's contention, subjective, and thus matters most of all by comparison to other files. Not just in terms of speed and length and stamina, but in how comfortable and playable it is for the player it challenges. At some point, playability needs to become the key concern--and that's something lost as one gets further from a given file presenting any sort of challenge.

First of all, gotta remind people that difficulty is AAA based currently. If all these 10 players rate the file so high, that's perfectly fine... if at least one of them can say why. You don't consider the fact that these players who "fight" the file probably don't have the AAA. Thinking this is elitist is just refusing to accept that more experienced/skilled players will likely have a better understanding of difficulty structure in general. A flagrant example of how it should go is the later rounds of D8 in the last OT. Many players in high end, including myself, tried to give the files proper ratings, but Silly and Etienne's opinions were a bit different in general and we all kinda followed them based on their scores. Nobody complained that these two were being elitists, that would've been nonsense. Their scores and feedback were very helpful in agreeing on where these insane files should go. The same principle applies to any range.

Also, difficulty is relative to other files in a specific range. That being said, I'm pretty confident that it's more likely for a lower level player to get lost in the ratings if they dont set a minimal structure because, as it's been pointed out, the lower end is messy af. One could easily fall in the trap of X feels harder than Y so it seems like it should be bumped up, but the fact is that Y is an outlier of its range and should Also be changed.

All in all, if any DC explains to me their decisions without any attempted objectivity in their comparisions, especially if on the basis that "difficulty is subjective", then I'll just lol and chances are people will complain.