| Legend11 said: It's pretty amazing that the mods and owner of this site in their efforts to get the most reliable numbers possible are willing to allow these kind of attacks against them in their very forums. It also shows true professionalism that they're willing to listen to their critics when it's obvious that most, like the critic that made this thread, don't even take the time to make sure their interpreation of the numbers is correct. They have my respect and I hope that they never let the critics get to them. |
TBH that's a good thing. I hate sites that try and protect themselves (like GAF). The site produces estimates. If anyone wants to check how detail is provided. If anyone wants to question the numbers it is permitted.
This is good. I know it means putting up with some silly crap as well - but for me it's the old Freedom of Speech angle. If you want Freedom of Speech you have to fundamentally accept you're going to hear things you don't like from time to time.
I say good for the mods/site that it doesn't react in a defensive way but maturely. I note that the team will respond to sensible queries on the numbers - I've exchanged some comments with ioi and the source in the past - and simply ignore anything obviously silly. That seems the best approach to me. Be open and in communication for any fair queries and just ignore anything obviously 'tin foil hat' orientated.
As for the numbers, sure, the 360 might be a bit up based on the MS numbers vs the estimates but if it seems enough to react to then the site will adjust as per its own policy of self adjustment.
Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...
