I find in most situations where I find myself, I only have r to try and judge one or a few persons. Judging a whole people seems to be a much harder, if even possible task.
In either case, wouldn't the acceptable judging criteria have to depend on the particular use case? Or might there be some universally good criteria?
There shouldn't be any criteria other than your own.
Human beings evolved to make sense of chaos through stories, judging others is a way to create a story for them, stereotypes are stories over groups of people. It's not wrong, it's how we're wired.
In the receiving end of a judgment, it's a fools errand to hope everyone thinks of you in the way you want them to, thinking that way is probably one of the hallmarks of narcissism.
On the giving end of judgments, I think there's an overwhelming sense of guilt for not judging everyone positively, in the hopes to be an unattainable goal of "goodness" that's part of our culture because of liberalism which itself grew out of Christianity.
As a culture, we've metastasized into these behaviors, nowadays everybody is worried of being perceived "positively" because of narcissism and perceiving others as "good" because of guilt of having the wrong feelings.
In either case, wouldn't the acceptable judging criteria have to depend on the particular use case? Or might there be some universally good criteria?