Please read before commenting on a Consolidated Start/Sit post

"Do I start _____ or _____ ?"

• No. Please don’t spam the comments with WDIS questions. They can get these posts removed and they dilute the potential for more meaningful discussion (or just more entertaining reactions to the circumstances of the week). I know the Index threads don't get a lot of responses, but still that's where those questions belong. Downvote these comments when you see them and don’t engage. Sounds harsh, but that’s just the way it is. We all know better and no, you’re not special (like Gronk vs USAA).
• When you're stuck on a decision, try asking questions that promote more discussion like "Is ____ really a good start this week considering [some particular circumstance]?" or offer your thoughts on the dilemma like "I don't know if I'd sit ____ for ____ since [your reasoning]." Boom, now you're following the rules and much more likely to get better feedback.

"Where is ____ ?" "No ____ ???"

• Players considered "obvious" starts (aka studs) or obvious sits (duds) are usually not included. When they are it's usually because of a special circumstance. So Josh Allen, Tyreek, CMC - don't expect to see their names and don't panic when you don't. Maybe panic if you do.

What is the wrong way to use this resource?

• Glance at the ranking order and assume the score is a rock-solid hierarchy upon which to set your line-up with no further context.
• Assume that the top-listed player is the absolute best start of the week and the bottom is the absolute worst.

What is the RIGHT way to use this resource?

• Understand that the whole purpose of Start 'Em, Sit 'Em is to help with a very specific subset of players - the ones you may be on the fence about this week - the tougher Start/Sit decisions. Largely these are players you are looking to stream or flex this week, not your every-week starters. The player at the top is not the absolute best player of the week, just the most unanimously-endorsed player that happened to be mentioned by this particular group of analysts.
• Go read the write-ups. The links are provided. The primary function of the sheets is to quickly show you which sites mention your player and link you to the source so you can easily see what was said and how they arrived at their conclusion. I'll say it again - the PRIMARY FUNCTION of these sheets is not the scoring, colors, or ranking - it is to direct you to the sources so you can understand the context of the writers' analysis and see if you agree with their rationale.

You said no obvious Start/Sits, but there are!

• Yeah every week there are pretty obvious calls that still make it in. If we start going down the road to as to why, by the time we're done you'll probably have graduated from relying on these at all. Sometimes it's because there's a particular circumstance this week that's worth mentioning. Sometimes it's lazy writing.

Why do some calls have parentheses around them?

• Not every Start/Sit call comes with notes and it sucks to go hunt down what the writer had to say only to find bupkis. The parentheses () are there to tell you there’s no write-up to support that call - the author just made the call and gave no further context. The good news is the calls with notes usually far outweigh those without.

What is a "Must Start" and why isn't it scored higher than "Start?"

• "Must Start" is just a section Sporting News includes at the top of each position listing the "shouldn't even need to mention" every-week Starts. They're only included here when a player gets specifically mentioned by another source - presumably because there's a unique circumstance to factor in that week. So we tally all the other sources' calls first, then go back add in SN's "Must Start" calls when applicable for the sake of consensus, transparency, and full disclosure. Scoring-wise I don't think they warrant any extra points, especially since they don't come with any analysis.

Note: This was the FAQ used by u/shmehdit when he was running the Consolidated Start 'Em, Sit 'Em FAQ. This post will probably be updated and/or replaced with one the more and more I get my feet wet with doing this.