At the Privileged Logics 2024 conference, there was broad agreement that metrics currently used are unfair and reproduce privilege. Reasons include adherence to a competitive scientific culture, perceptions that these metrics are objective, their usefulness in appealing to outsiders for engagement and recruitment, and inertia and/or mistaken notions of rigor from those who have been at the institution for a long time and don’t want to change the way things are done. Examples of metrics that have affected outcomes for individuals due to privilege included: The demand for novelty and transformation (although there can also be an anti-innovation bias denying merit to delivery modes such as podcasts as well as to core expanding substantive areas and a focus on community impact) over replication and incremental gains Statistical significance as a measure for worthwhile research Tenure as a status attached to financial stability Grades as measures of learning and achievement Differential tre...