On that we agree, ratings are not directly correlated to "quality", just as product sales figures do not indicate the best product. And what is "best" is going to be different on an individual basis. I've never said (and I know you weren't pointing at me) that his shows are crap because they have bad ratings, only that his programs don't appeal to the relatively broad audience necessary to keep a show on a major network, and in that case ratings are definitely relevant to the conversation. He's a geek with certain sensibilities that appeals to a narrow audience of devoted fans. I just wish they'd realize that instead of calling everyone else tasteless. And believe me, if you've run across a Browncoat on this board you've tasted that. Especially when Serenity hit theatres, that entire year was pretty bad. To say something bad about Whedon or any of his shows in the Sci-Fi forum was to invite the wrath of about a dozen posters, many of whom would skirt the line of warnable offences to give you their opinion of your opinion. "Post #827 about why the world is stupid and Fox is stupid for Serenity's failure", and "Ten reasons I can rationalize that Serenity was not a BO flop and there will be a sequel". Many of these conversations always led back to why the mainstream audience doesn't seem to love his work, and it's never about him, it's always about extraneous factors in some minds; that's what I was talking about. See Lindley's response in this current thread for a mild example of the "you obviously didn't get it but I'm sure if you watched it again with the right frame of mind you would" attitude. Not that Lindley was being hostile about it, he/she wasn't.