Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Wayside" data-source="post: 5707913" data-attributes="member: 8394">I question your ability because I find your reviews to be consistently unhelpful. They do have lots of words, which for some people amounts to them being &quot;thorough,&quot; but your habit of criticizing products for not conforming to some metric you just made up of what they should be doesn't cut it. It's lazy criticism. On the other hand, at least you don't come off as a paid shill like the Pathfinder reviewer does.You didn't offend anyone. The claim was simply wrong, and we all know what happens when someone is wrong on the Internet. Google+ has about 6% of Facebook's active user base, and the vast majority of them still use Facebook as well. There's also the small matter of Google+ not yet being a serious gaming platform, for reasons partially spelled out by Google employee Steve Yegge in <a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3101876" target="_blank">a rant from earlier this week</a>.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Wayside, post: 5707913, member: 8394"] I question your ability because I find your reviews to be consistently unhelpful. They do have lots of words, which for some people amounts to them being "thorough," but your habit of criticizing products for not conforming to some metric you just made up of what they should be doesn't cut it. It's lazy criticism. On the other hand, at least you don't come off as a paid shill like the Pathfinder reviewer does. You didn't offend anyone. The claim was simply wrong, and we all know what happens when someone is wrong on the Internet. Google+ has about 6% of Facebook's active user base, and the vast majority of them still use Facebook as well. There's also the small matter of Google+ not yet being a serious gaming platform, for reasons partially spelled out by Google employee Steve Yegge in [URL="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3101876"]a rant from earlier this week[/URL]. [/QUOTE]

Verification