sucker for the lists....

[ursus]

When my kids are sick, I like to give them Pepsi. So my wife says I should give them Diet Pepsi because she read in a magazine that the sugar makes it harder for them to get better blah blah blah blah blah....

I think that 99% of the stuff in those "list" magazines is absolute made-up garbage.

"4 Things You Eat EVERY DAY that are KILLING YOU..."

"7 Dangerous Things YOUR KIDS are Doing that YOU DON'T KNOW..."



Do you like the lists? Why do they feel they need a number in the list to sell magazines? Am I DEAD WRONG? Are there "5 Reasons Ursus is Dead Wrong" ?

[Blide]

Any online list that's done in slideshow format deserves to be ignored by default.

[Dan]

There's a few things you can always count on to be near the bottom of any list. Fresno, Bakersfield, and Yuma.

[Otis]

My favorite list was in Coastal Living magazine. It was something like "The Ten Best Coastal Small Towns." One of them did not even exist. It was a PUD that we had approved, but not a single shovel of dirt had been moved. It was still just a patch of trees. The mag needed to do some fact checking. Great real estate marketing, though.

[kms]

Any online list that's done in slideshow format deserves to be ignored by default.

That's how I feel. If they're calling it a list, I want to read words in a column.

[Mud Princess]

Forbes is constantly coming out with some sort of list, usually geographically-based. You go to the magazine's website, suffer through an ad, then find that the only way to review the "list" is to go through a slow and worthless slide show. Feh.

We should come up with our own lists for fun. You know, like Best Places to Drink Microbrews, Worst Places to Be a Planner, that sort of thing. I'm sure they would be equally valid.

[Blide]

There's some random website that has this fair city ranked as one of the most dangerous in the country. Of course the elected officials disagree vehemently and are attacking the methodology. Admittedly the methodology might be a bit suspect but it doesn't change the fact that there's still a problem...

[Maister]

Someone needs to compile a list of the most dubious lists.

[dvdneal]

I like lists, they organize things for me. I can't say they're right, but it's interesting too see what someone I don't care about thinks is the top 100 whatever of the year.

To start some lists...
Reasons Ursus is wrong
1. You asked for reasons
2. Lists are there to start an argument, not to be right (that includes my list)
3. Someone else can make up the rest.

Worst places to be a planner
1. Houston - it has to be on the list somewhere
2. Phoenix area - you feel less like a planner and more like a rubber stamp
3. Rural county in any state - we don't need you're stinkin commie codes

Best place for a microbrew
1. The beach (sorry, I don't have great places around me so add away)

[ursus]

Come on, though. Let's assume the magazine lists are correct for a moment, and think about what that would mean:

For starters, it means that there are at least 5,468 things that women can do in bed that will (and I quote) "Blow Men's Minds!"

Raise your hand, gentlemen, if you think that number may be just a little off.

Also, it means everything both causes and cures cancer. Plus everyone makes more and less money than you do.

[Blide]

Come on, though. Let's assume the magazine lists are correct for a moment, and think about what that would mean:

How can there simultaneously be 27 different "best beach in the world?" How can you reconcile all the differing lists? I mean we can't have preference ever entering any of these lists.

[ursus]

How can there simultaneously be 27 different "best beach in the world?" How can you reconcile all the differing lists? I mean we can't have preference ever entering any of these lists.

Exactly. It's really super meaningful because they attach a number to it. It's the same stuff regurgitated over and over and it largely has no basis in fact (either statistical or even allegorical) but it's gotta have a number:

Try these 8 tips for a better relationship!

How about MY tips for a better relationship: There are three:

1. talk less
2. listen more
3. touch more

Now if I was a writer for Redbook, my job for the month is 90% done. Holy crap, what a load all that stuff is.

[Zoning Goddess]

For starters, it means that there are at least 5,468 things that women can do in bed that will (and I quote) "Blow Men's Minds!"

Which brain are you talking about?

[ursus]

Which brain are you talking about?

It's sweet of you to act like you believe that men have a brain at all when it comes to this subject. Not necessary because we know what we are, but sweet.

[Whose Yur Planner]

The Book of Lists, in all of it's editions. They all are interesting reads, if you are into to that sort of thing. From our friends at Wiki. The Book of Lists refers to any one of a series of books compiled by David Wallechinsky, his father Irving Wallace and sister Amy Wallace.[1][2][3][4][5] Each book contains hundreds of lists (many accompanied by textual explanations) on unusual or esoteric topics, for example:

The world's greatest libel suits[7]
People suspected of being Jack the Ripper[8]
Worst places to hitchhike
People misquoted by Ronald Reagan
Breeds of dogs which bite people the most, and the least[9]
The first Book of Lists was published in 1977, a second volume came out in 1980 and the third appeared in 1983. Book of Lists for the 1990s was published in 1993; yet another volume, The New Book of Lists, was published in 2005. The first volume was initially controversial and banned in some libraries and parts of the United States when it was published due to, among other things, a chapter that graphically described popular sexual positions and their pros and cons.[10] The 2005 volume was essentially "new" in name only; it was made up primarily of reprinted and updated lists selected from the first three volumes, which have gone out of print.

[Maister]

Best and worst run cities in the US list