The "great things are amazing" is peer reviewed by amazing people.

This rating system would make most people "not great."

So the not-so-great people shelved their not-so-greatness and started acting as if the reviewed stuff was something to be appreciated by peer reviewing it.

There is some question as to whether this is the ethical thing to do.

There are also the type of people who don't see the value in "recognition from people who aren't great".

I mean, that's the thing about worrying about that kind of public reputation.

---