@0_0.Q: If you had bothered to read the OP you would have noticed that the formula applies only to entertainment; this isn't the first time I had to correct a person about introducing examples outside that realm, nor are you the first to use cars as an example. Someone else used a house. A car's attributes are not subjective, they are measurable in terms of performance and reliability. Science can prove which is better. With entertainment, personal taste is the only deciding factor, and sales the only unbiased way to measure a population's preference. I have yet to hear anyone who has disagreed with me propose a better system using an objective measuring stick.
@Vlad: I know very well that Buffy is not Twilight. I was a huge fan of that series well before Twilight had been conceived, but I've heard enough about Twilight to know that there are a number of parallels and Whedonites are understandably pissed about that. I have a couple cousins who were Twilight fangirls until I introduced them to Buffy; they went out and bought all seven seasons, then the Season 8 comics, a Buffy calandar and I'm not sure what else. They were more willing to spend money on Buffy because they believed it to be better quality. Whovians, I imagine, would perhaps be inclined to purchase replicas of the Sonic Screwdriver, or a TARDIS cookie jar. I'm not sure how many followers of Jersey Shore are willing to invest in Snooki action figures, so there's that angle as well. And though I have not looked into it, I don't think that boxsets of Survivor do especially well against, say, Dexter. A larger audience doesn't mean a more appreciative one.
Because Twilight was successful it indicated a need for more of the Vampire/Human romance, and so then True Blood rose to success, yet it was hardly alone in modern literature feature vampire/human romance, it was just better so others remain in obscurity. For all this talk about intelligence, I expect you to exercise critical thinking. Because so far all you've done is demonstrate an intolerance to people who enjoy things that you do not, accusing them of being unintelligent because they have different tastes. If you are to continue to do so and expect to be taken seriously, you will be expected to demonstrate intelligence superior to their own or explain how one's tastes is a reflection of their intellect without having to rely solely on your opinion. You must be objective when making such extraordinary claims.
@Everyone who disagrees with my claim: If not sales/profit, what would you consider to be the best objective measuring stick for quality? I have yet to hear a single proposal. Most people are just disagreeing outright, using their own opinions as evidence enough. How should I be able to tell the difference which opinion is correct? I get the feeling that people are disagreeing simply because they believe something to be high-quality but it's financially less successful than things that the same people consider low quality. I urge you to explore beyond the limits of your own personal preferences and explain how one can recognize quality in something that you detest, or at least admit that you could be absolutely wrong when you believe that something is very good.
@People who appreciate my grammar: thank you. If I must sound insane, at least I appear lucid.
