Start Daniel Gibson! His offensive game (heaving jumpers) isn't conducive toward series-long consistency, but if he begins the game on a hot streak, LeBron might have that much more wiggle room in the fourth. And if it doesn't work, we get to giggle like second-graders hearing Jeff Van Gundy yelp "Boobie!"

Really, though, this is over. Blow up the Cavs, let Bron-Bron realize his destiny with a slashing Parker-type, put Tim Duncan on your all-time starting five (second team).

See, that's why I love rateyourmusic.com... they weight people's ratings. If you write one review, your rating on any given album is now weighted slightly above the baseline. The more reviews you write, the greater your weight will be, up to 40% above the baseline. The formulation is set up against people rating everything 1 or 5 stars, users who are no longer active, as well as a flurry of ratings in one day (U2 fans on release day, for instance, or organized efforts from American Idol messageboard... the remain mystified that for all their best efforts, Chris Daughtry's early project Absent Element carries an anemic 1.87 rating). It's not egalitarian at all, but it's not hard to improve your standing: be informed, show some judgment, work at it. You can also find users based on compatibility rankings that take into account how popular certain records are that you and another have in common. I didn't start the thing (I'm just a mod), but still - great site.

This game will prove the Spurs to be the weakest "dynasty" the NBA has ever known. Cos San Antonio doesn't strike fear into the hearts of opponents, they just annoy 'em. Duncan and co. are extremely adaptable - a coach's dream, really, other than a Hall of Fame starting five a la 60s/70s Celts - and that's why they're winning. Once in a while they'll blow a team out of the water, but their margin of victory in the regular season was a relatively paltry 8 ppg. This is a squad very much of its time, able to pick up the pace but preferring sub-80s slapfests.

I think the reasoning is simply to encourage ongoing, active participation in the site. I don't believe it's a judgment against older reviews per se; rather, it's a safeguard (in my opinion) against people who sign up, post four or five reviews or fifteen ratings, and disappear. Maybe within their small sample there's some interesting info. Then again, it could be a fanboy, never to be seen again, supporting his favorite artist the week of their CD release. Or it's someone about whose taste you can't really get a bead because they've rated a couple of things and vanished.

Having said all this, a user's weight doesn't go down until they've been absent 60 days; from there it's a gradual decrease until 180 days (if I remember right)... but the minimum weight for someone with one decent-sized review and some ratings is 80%. It can't go lower, and as soon as you log back in, your previous weight is restored.

And yeah, I like the real-name feature on Amazon but don't care for the Top Reviewer nonsense either. Rateyourmusic has a list of users with the most words & reviews, but only the admins know people's exact weightings. There's no such designation as "top reviewer", but you can sort all the reviews for Joni Mitchell's Hejira, say, by weight (or rating, or length).

You almost lost me with "In a weird way, it wasn't that different from punk." - you have it backwards, punk in the way you're envisioning it isn't really that different from pop, which is what Journey started making once Perry joined the band - but still, dead on. Discerning authenticity is a fool's pastime, and I'll take "Don't Stop Believing" over "Smells Like Teen Spirit" any day. Sure, Kurt's lyrical banalities are tucked in further, but the emotionalism of Perry's delivery just kind of renders words moot. When that track comes on in the car, the iTunes, the strip club, wherever - I go nuts like the coke dealer in Boogie Nights. ("Sister Christian" - another ostensibly trite pop slayer!)

This is why I got so pissed that Paul Rudd didn't come up with a better argument for Steely Dan in Knocked Up... they're like the fucking Beatles for me, and they routinely get slagged as yacht rock. Sheen is sometimes the time-release portion of the song capsule. Sometimes I need Half Japanese, but sometimes I need Brutal Juice. Lo-fi as an end is a joke. Fantastic post, David.

The Spurs are champions. They are a championship organization, the most successful this decade. And I live in Austin, Texas. Yet I'm completely unenthused about their run of success (as well as calling four non-consecutive championships in nine years a 'dynasty').

I was talking a bit out my ass with the points differential, I'll admit. But remember that the Spurs were next to the bottom in pace this year. So an 8 ppg differential puts them in the top 1/7 of all championship teams... well, they didn't get it by blowing teams out of the water. Most of Hollinger's top 20 teams had a ppg differential in the double digits, and these teams generally hailed from eras of faster, more offensive-oriented play. I know I'm splitting hairs - give these guys their due etc. The Spurs win, but their style of winning is killing the NBA. I cheered when the Pistons knocked off the Lakers in '04, but if they'd won the next three championships I don't think I could've taken it.

I don't recall much talk about blowing the NFL playoff system up when the NFC routinely thrashed the AFC. But then again, that could be because you occasionally got some spectacular single-elimination games during the semis.

Jamie makes up for the "Ana Molly" video. Sly where Pink's "Stupid Girls" was childish.