please read ephemeral's closed PR on osu-wiki first, the conversation started there

tl;dr of OP: change intersubjective to social issues
tl;dr of Naxess's comment: change objective, intersubjective, subjective to rule, shared opinion, opinion

the goal of both is to clarify what these words actually stand for. I think Naxess's idea is more clear

for context, this change was in response to the dq of this mapset being viewed by some people as too subjective, while others viewed the idea of ranking the map as "intersubjectively" bad

i dont know what the change would accomplish since its basically word replacement so uhhhhhh

I didn't even know that was the context but Naxess's proposal helps regardless, he makes a good point why these "objective"/"subjective" terms are misleading

goal listed in OP, at least that was my interpretation

the phrases "subjective" and "objective" have been so deeply ingrained into the vocabulary of nearly every mapper and modder forever so i think removing them would be pretty confusing to do this late, though honestly intersubjective as a phrase is basically never used so im all for finding a replacement for that. Shared opinion seems okay but i think there has to be a better and more suitable option available..

if it were my choice id honestly just completely remove intersubjective or an equivalent as a term because its just gonna lead to more confusion in the future no matter how you reword it + subjective just ties into this and common beliefs/shared opinions are already pretty well known

conversely I'd argue the fact that BNs and some mappers rely on misleading vocabulary means we should change this sooner rather than later/never. and the words naxess proposed are already far more common than the current ones

descriptions' changes are good too, not only the words

i have a feeling this is a topic that too few people care about to contribute to

having given it another look, i think naxess's idea of changing "objective" to "rule" + its explanation is helpful, since it shows that rules are just subjective things that are universally agreed upon (beyond the near-universalness of a "shared opinion"/"intersubjective issue")

so let's go forward with something like that..? unless someone has some last minute criticisms

This change is as unneccessary as it can get. As long as I do not see an inherent need to change that (other than Ephemeral just disliking it?) or as long as someone is unable to reason out why the current usage of "subjective", "objective" and "intersubjective" is not conform with what these terms are universally defined as (and all three are clearly defined scientific measurement types), I assume that the current usage follows proper terminology. I am yet to see examples where the current usage is faulty or misleading or confusing.

A "shared opinion" is not conveying the level of "near-objectivity" that the term "intersubjective" inherits and is defined as. Intersubjective facts are still facts. They are only based on a consensus amongst close-to-everyone instead of mathematical logic and measurement (e.g. 1+1 = 2). An example for intersubjectivity is basically any law book (as morality and what is right or wrong is ultimatively subjective, however, whole societies have agreed upon a consensus to follow and wrote laws for it. A drastic example would be that nobody likes to see random people be killed, so we all just agreed on forbidding it eventually)

In that conclusion, actually majority of the Ranking Criteria is somewhat like a law book. Therefore, the Ranking Criteria is in it's very core intersubjective. And in the modding and mapping world, there are many "unwritten laws" that people follow. Things that you can not shape into a black-or-white Ranking Criteria rule and sometimes are only reflected in guidelines (if even). Intersubjective issues are those issues that break said "unwritten laws" that nobody ever bothered to put into words in shape of a rule (which would require said black-or-white assessment) or a guideline.

I would also favour people being able to actually write down said "unwritten laws", but we all know that as soon as we write it down, we fail to pay attention to context (such as not all of these unwritten laws apply equally to every map, as every map is different and in some cases, it works and it some it does not). In it's very core, all of these things *are* subjective, but they are so much universally agreed upon that they simply turned into law.

Removing the term "intersubjective issues" with "shared opinion" devalues the nature of issues that indeed try to address violations of said "unwritten laws", as "shared opinion" would only mean that "many people think it's bad", which is not really the same as "unwritten laws".

A very prominent and recent example for an intersubjective issue would be the taiko map "My Movie". There is no rule that forbids it. There is no guideline that prevents it. But there is an "unwritten law" that this shouldn't be done.

"This issue violates standards of community consensus" is quite a mouthful and "intersubjective issue" directly conveys what is meant.

Archiving as it appears discussion has concluded and Loctav's post sums up why not to change it well enough.