I post this time and time again.
More people need to actually read things about the site and the sites numbers.
What VGChartz offers is timely data that isn't meant to be 100% accurate but be in the right range. We don't compete with the likes of NPD, GFK or ChartTrack; we offer a service that is totally different. One that is not based on comprehensive and direct retail tracking, but rather uses modern and alternative methods to quickly arrive at estimates, combined with a database of historical sales - constantly adjusted and tweaked to be as accurate as possible.
However, even with the greatest of diligence, our data is still just an estimate so whenever quoting a figure from VGChartz it should be listed as an estimate and readers should be made aware that there is a margin of error associated. With this in mind, VGChartz data is fine for most applications - from a year-on-year genre analysis to first-day estimates for a major title to a ballpark estimate of total sales to date for a given game. It just requires the user to have a little common sense and realise that an estimate is not exact but better than having no information and intended to point you in the right direction.
Its really not all that difficult to understand. Constantly crying and clammering for adjustments wont get anything sorted. Its like going for a meal thats been payed for you by the restaurant yet sitting there complaining that the presentation isnt perfect and refusing to eat it until its fixed.
People need to understand that without actual solid evidence, they are pointlessly trying to get the numbers changed (most likely due to a bias). Find evidence that supports your claim, from other sales trackers or publishers/developers. Dont just say "UNDERTRACKED! Why? Because I said so!"
No wonder ioi gets annoyed and pissed off at some people.