When I first started reading this topic I was in line with most of the people in thinking that giving a B- a score of 67 was horribly wrong but after reading the post by Dodece I now have to totally agree that it may not.
As an math teacher myself I can say that at least in our academic circle a B- is more commonly used for 80% give or take a few % when the need arises (I've gone down to 75 even for some). However, now I see the point that some review sites are merely using the grading system to make middling scores seem not as bad as they used to.
Recall the time when EGM used scores in their reviews. I do believe that they made it a point to note that a 5 was an average score (I'd have to check my old EGMs in the garage to make sure but I'm sure someone can double check). If a C is an average score now then I can definitely see how a C be given the score of 50 and a c- = 47 like someone mentioned was given to Too Human? It actually makes some sense now at least if you think about it clearly but I guess that just leads to more debate on why the rating system was changed in the first place. If anything it also could lead to a debate on how grading in schools could need reform (a topic that has been touched upon at my school this past spring actually) :P
“When I was 5 years old, my mom always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down “happy.” They told me I didn’t understand the assignment and I told them they didn’t understand life." - author unknown
