[Serious question] Why does Dan Slott get more criticism than Straczynski

[RD!]

The best way to compare sales is by seeing how they did in their own markets

Ie if JMS made the top ten in his time, vs Slott making the top ten now.

[boots]

If one could poll 100% of the fanbase and readers, it probably will be reliable. However, since that can't be done, polls are inherently inaccurate, even if they offer some insight into thoughts and opinions.

polls work well though, even without a 100% polling rate. mathematically speaking, a poll of just 1600 or so people on a national scale is meant to only produce a 2.5% margin of error. the idea being that even if you polled 10 different groups of 1600- each group would give roughly the same results. that's why it's important to look at several polls to help mitigate that margin of error across the board. you can work out an average that gets you close enough to a 100% polling.

the problem isn't necessarily the sample size, it's the quality of the polling. (most) internet and magazine polling are notorious for inaccuracy and attracting "zealots", and for using leading questions. just like everyone is saying, cbr polls shouldn't be taken as anything more than a bit of fun.

[boots]

The Top 50 stories poll was of general CBR readers, so it's going to get a wide array of opinions, including from softer Spider-Man fans (those that might read some Spider-Man comics, but aren't going to argue about it in the forums.)

how was that sample size qualified? was there a section of questions that participants had to fill out stating how often/much spider-man they read? generally speaking any poll where respondents volunteer to vote, rather than being specifically sought out is gonna be inaccurate af

i'm really, really, really sceptical that a poll of general cbr readers = industry accuracy, just the fact that they all read cbr tends to suggest a narrow demographic. but hey, i wasn't there...

[Mister Mets]

how was that sample size qualified? was there a section of questions that participants had to fill out stating how often/much spider-man they read? generally speaking any poll where respondents volunteer to vote, rather than being specifically sought out is gonna be inaccurate af

i'm really, really, really sceptical that a poll of general cbr readers = industry accuracy, just the fact that they all read cbr tends to suggest a narrow demographic. but hey, i wasn't there...

There's an element of selection bias, but I think it will be greater diversity then if they has just asked people at this forum, as it includes other groups of readers. It's not just CBR readers who come to the Spider-Man forum, or even just the regulars on any forum, and I think that makes a difference compared to any random website that might try something similar (which isn't to say any results published by those sites lack value.)

[boots]

There's an element of selection bias, but I think it will be greater diversity then if they has just asked people at this forum, as it includes other groups of readers. It's not just CBR readers who come to the Spider-Man forum, or even just the regulars on any forum, and I think that makes a difference compared to any random website that might try something similar (which isn't to say any results published by those sites lack value.)

cool- how did cbr track that the responder info? was it web analytics? or was it data gathered when signing in to the poll?

tbh it still sounds like open access polling to me

[Mister Mets]

cool- how did cbr track that the responder info? was it web analytics? or was it data gathered when signing in to the poll?

tbh it still sounds like open access polling to me

It's pretty clearly open access polling.

While it is a system in which participants self-select, the same would be true of any measure determining that Slott is criticized more than JMS, so it would serve as an alternate to that notion.

[boots]

It's pretty clearly open access polling.

While it is a system in which participants self-select, the same would be true of any measure determining that Slott is criticized more than JMS, so it would serve as an alternate to that notion.

ah, i get what you’re saying. yeah, the assertions are no less accurate than each other.

but i personally don’t believe there’s much more weight to a general cbr than a cbr spidey message board poll

[WebLurker]

polls work well though, even without a 100% polling rate. mathematically speaking, a poll of just 1600 or so people on a national scale is meant to only produce a 2.5% margin of error. the idea being that even if you polled 10 different groups of 1600- each group would give roughly the same results. that's why it's important to look at several polls to help mitigate that margin of error across the board. you can work out an average that gets you close enough to a 100% polling.

the problem isn't necessarily the sample size, it's the quality of the polling. (most) internet and magazine polling are notorious for inaccuracy and attracting "zealots", and for using leading questions. just like everyone is saying, cbr polls shouldn't be taken as anything more than a bit of fun.

Okay.

10char

[Spiderfang]

From what I've gleaned from this thread and others it seems a vast majority of the negative feedback that Slott receives is more of a personal nature rather than a professional one, that is I've seen more criticisms toward Slott regarding his responses to questions, forum participation and social interaction altogether but when the topic of his actual work comes into play (such as Clone Conspiracy) often times I see it get dismissed readily as "it's Slott, so it's bad" (not exact wording but the gist of what gets posted half of the time). I neither consider myself a Straczynski or a Slott fan, however gleaning from what maybe seems to be a majority of the forum's (or at least this Spider-Man sub forum) attitude on Slott makes it difficult to form an impartial opinion.

[rrb]

Dan Slott's run has been amazing. It's had many highs, and some lows, but overall he has been one of the best Spider-man writers ever.

[Spidey_Legend]

To me is simply. Slott wrote a lot more of Spidey's issue. In my mind, a writer shouldn't be more than 5 years with the same character. It creat stress and lack of new good ideas because of routine. Slott should have take a rest after Superior and if Marvel wants him in the book again, he should start writing after issue 700.

[Zeitgeist]

Anyway, on topic

One of the big reasons why Slott gets a swell of criticism (much of it completely unfair IMO) is simply because he has the dubious honour of being the first long running Amazing writer since OMD. At the risk of generalising, it always seems that most of people who dislike Slott are people who don't like the changes from the OMD storyline, and seem to hold his stories emblematic of everything they feel is wrong.

[Frontier]

Anyway, on topic

One of the big reasons why Slott gets a swell of criticism (much of it completely unfair IMO) is simply because he has the dubious honour of being the first long running Amazing writer since OMD. At the risk of generalising, it always seems that most of people who dislike Slott are people who don't like the changes from the OMD storyline, and seem to hold his stories emblematic of everything they feel is wrong.

Well, I think whether intentionally or not, his run also embodies some of the issues people have with post-OMD Spider-Man.

[WebLurker]

Well, I think whether intentionally or not, his run also embodies some of the issues people have with post-OMD Spider-Man.

Yeah, I mean, his take on the series is very different from what came before and doesn't really conform to what a lot of people would consider "typical" Spider-Man. Whether that's good or bad is personal preference.

[Mister Mets]

A few posts on a comment in another blog were deleted.