In reply to:
Wrong. IF YOU READ the first few lines, weeks on chart is the FAIREST, MOST ACCURATE method
Wrong. If you read the first few lines, it says merely that it has been suggested that the ‘weeks on chart’ figure represents the fairest, most accurate method of ranking acts
Suggested, and I don't care how good these guys are at compiling stats, if they think this is the most accurate method, they're none too bright.
Anyone with half a brain could blow a number of holes in this crazy "suggestion". For example:
(1) Albums became big sellers at some point (70s, I think, but I could be wrong on this unimportant detail). Equating a week on the charts back in 1955 when albums sold much less with a week on the charts in 1995 when the market for albums was so much bigger is dumb.
(2) Albums sales are seasonal. A week on the charts in the holiday season is worth a lot more than a week on the charts in February.
(3) Saying that one week at #100 is the same as a week at #1 is crazy. At the very least, there should be weighting in their calculations.
And so on.
Really, Adam, I hope you're a little more logical and a little more questioning in your thinking when you're looking after your 450 or whatever students.
In reply to:
You cantankerous dumb blonde.
Now, now, no need to get personal, midget.
"The Smarter than Shelle Club: p2c not welcome." --- Beltene