>>18148289
Not at all, and even if it were true I don't see how that refutes a word of what I said.
What's a better source for looking up whether a show or match or worker is worth checking out. I'll wait while you come up with some more cope or come up with another red herring to toss out there. Because we both know you won't be able to come up with a better site.
(And no. Nielsen ratings don't tell you whether a show is actually good, just how many eyes were on it. The eyes are on it before it's ever good or bad and thus it's irrelevant as a measure of quality. The final seasons of GoT got great ratings but that didn't stop them from being dogshit.)
