Yes, because getting called up to be in Contestants' Row and winning a chance to play Plinko is so much worse off.
I think the point there (though you can never be sure because internet commenters) is that Plinko is a game of feast or famine; either you win $10,000 or more, or you don't.
True. On both statements (Plinko being feast/famine and commenters being commenters...for lack of a better term).
Plinko can certainly be criticized for certain aspects, especially about how much blind-assed luck plays a factor (as in probably moreso than just about any other game with a couple exceptions, and that's saying something), but it's far from the most overrated (I could think of three, maybe four, that could get a better argument and will share if you'd like).
I'd figure this: if you asked a bunch of random people on the street what their desire would be if they were fortunate enough to be there and in that situation (and had full control over it), the two answers you'd hear most often would be "to play for a car" or "to play Plinko".
I think that what we've learned here is that the internet is not random folks.
Understatement, again. But going back to your point about commentaries on the Internet, I raise the following: far too many have the idea that their opinion counts more than anyone else's (hence why so many bloggers seem like they talk down to their audience).
