But would it say if he removed it himself?
Don't know, don't care overmuch, really.
(it wasn't really the worst results site...just too much cruft)
I remember one time early on where I tried to drive a point home posting a comment to his thing. He then extrapolated it as "Travis Eberle, winner of a car on The Price is Right, is a reader." So one, he's confusing me with Travis Schario, thing two, I'm a reader only in the most literal and least helpful means.
As to the point about cruft: he assumes everyone knows what he does/agrees with him and therefore does not have to explain all of the jargony bits or indeed the terms and phrases he has made up. The Economist assumes that you have a background in business or economics, or at least has had enough education to understand their chosen argot and therefore doesn't explain those terms, but at least they write like sane people and don't drop in nonsense phrases like "BANKRUPT TRASH" or abbreviate everything in sight because he can't write out "$25,000".
And apparently his time is so valuable that he is compelled to abbreviate the word "week" as "wk.", saving that critical keystroke. Plus there was that time he was in such a hurry to post results of that night's Teen Tournament episode here that he got the names of the participants wrong.
I was looking through GSK to see what he thought were the top players of 2015 were. (Yeah, I did it last year, but it was too much leaning toward J!, but I think Matt Jackson and Alex Jacobs would have been the top two from non-reality shows).
Thing one: it's Alex Jacob, not Jacobs. The guy won nearly $400,000 and is tenth all-time on the earnings list--at the very least get his name right.
Thing two: why would you need his help? You watch all of the television he does, and the reaction of the list would be largely the same whether you copied it verbatim from some website or whether you dreamed it up.
