nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: − + Line 867:
Line 867: + +
Talk:Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (view source)
Revision as of 00:58, November 4, 2008
, 00:58, November 4, 2008Reinstate posts deleted for no apparent reason.
Page has become a vandalism magnet - which, by the way, proves the thesis of the movie: people want to shut Stein up instead of answering his points. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 09:43, 21 April 2008 (EDT)
Page has become a vandalism magnet - which, by the way, proves the thesis of the movie: people want to shut Stein up instead of answering his points. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 09:43, 21 April 2008 (EDT)
:Ed, with respect, I think that all it really proves is that vandals exist and they like hot button issues.[[User:Jros83|Jros83]] 18:59, 2 September 2008 (EDT)
==Categories==
==Categories==
IMDB, RottenTomatoes.com, Amazon.com and other ratings/review gathering sites are worthless because they rely on user submissions and can be skewed by people with a lot of free time on their hands (much like the way online polls are often skewed). IMDB and Amazon both have user-based ratings/reviews and Rotten Tomatoes has user-submitted ratings/reviews by other people who may or may not be well-known. I mean, on RT, they have ratings/reviews by such household names as Ken Hanke of the Mountain Xpress in Asheville, NC, and Fred Topel of Can Magazine (I've been in a lot of bookstores and libraries and I can say I've never seen Can Magazine - which sounds like a magazine which needs to be placed in a special obscuring bag on the top shelf), among others. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 00:28, 28 August 2008 (EDT)
IMDB, RottenTomatoes.com, Amazon.com and other ratings/review gathering sites are worthless because they rely on user submissions and can be skewed by people with a lot of free time on their hands (much like the way online polls are often skewed). IMDB and Amazon both have user-based ratings/reviews and Rotten Tomatoes has user-submitted ratings/reviews by other people who may or may not be well-known. I mean, on RT, they have ratings/reviews by such household names as Ken Hanke of the Mountain Xpress in Asheville, NC, and Fred Topel of Can Magazine (I've been in a lot of bookstores and libraries and I can say I've never seen Can Magazine - which sounds like a magazine which needs to be placed in a special obscuring bag on the top shelf), among others. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 00:28, 28 August 2008 (EDT)
: Whilst I agree with much of that, your comments about Can Magazine, based solely on your ignorance of it and its name, is inappropriate. [http://www.canmag.com/ It appears] to be a legitimate magazine. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:45, 28 August 2008 (EDT)
: Whilst I agree with much of that, your comments about Can Magazine, based solely on your ignorance of it and its name, is inappropriate. [http://www.canmag.com/ It appears] to be a legitimate magazine. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:45, 28 August 2008 (EDT)
:Dinsdale's more-or-less on the money. LT, the problem is that people ''do'' game the system, and on a site like Amazon or IMDB, there's no accountability. At least with professional reviewers, you can ascertain their biases based on their record of reviews, and filter what they say accordingly; when Joe Blow from Passaic puts up a rating, there's no way of knowing for sure whether it's an honest rating or motivated by political bias. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 14:47, 29 August 2008 (EDT)
== Expelled now on Amazon. PZ gets his fans to flood item with phony 1-star reviews. ==
== Expelled now on Amazon. PZ gets his fans to flood item with phony 1-star reviews. ==