Abandon Final Word Marketing

As of the date of this suggestion (5/30/22) the home page of the Canonizer features a video entitled

Canonizer. The Final Word. On Everything.

It seems the video has been updated and improved, however it still suggests the Canonizer to be the "final word on everything" which most focus group candidates find to be off putting by reason of simply being incorrect, false puffery, and clearly outside the realm of a realistic claim.

Not only can it be argued that the claim that Canonizer is "the final word on everything" is false puffery and unrealistic, it also reflects, sadly, attitudes, perceptions, and perspectives of the Canonizer team that are not to their credit.

The Canonizer, can, if it chooses to, play a useful role in tracking and identifying the comparative support for different emerging points of view that have been contributed and indicated on the Canonizer website, only.

The achievement of that goal, while perhaps useful, is hardly the "final word" on anything.

It is grossly unrealistic to assume the registered participants in Canonizer discussions are, or ever will be even a statistically accurate representative of all credible opinions on any given subject. Especially given the comparative substandard state of the website which is widely considered self-defeating on that basis alone.

It is grossly unrealistic to represent that a clear understanding of a non- representative emerging consensus on the Canonizer is the end (final word) of consideration that a reasonable quest for the truth and proper understanding of any subject warrants.

It is grossly unrealistic, and, in fact, irrational to represent, suggest, infer, or imply that any limited consensus or even a truly representative consensus might reasonably equate to the truth or "final word" on any topic.

To understand emerging consensus is to partially understand political realities to the extent the tracking is accurate and truly representative. The political realities of evolving opinions, expert or otherwise, have been historically demonstrated and appropriately philosophically declared to have very little to do with truth or the "final word" on any topic.

To further complicate the subject of consensus we must now grapple with the reality that special interest groups with deep pockets now engage "contrived consensus" specialists to recruit paid or influenced support for positions that serve those special interests. When support for a position is recruited with incentives or other meaningful influence, that reality invalidates the credibility and usefulness of the purported consensus.

The contribution the Canonizer makes, is a useful approach to tracking consensus among participants. Nothing more. That is useful enough to merit attention and dedication to the completion of the Canonizer with the goal of bringing it up to acceptable web site standards for marketing.

Over selling it with unrealistic claims that are clearly either disingenuous, or worse, representative of sincerely misguided notions of the Canonizer team is not helpful. It hurts the credibility of the project and speaks something quite uncomplimentary about its management.

This marketing campaign should be removed or overhauled promptly. It is the first thing people see on the home page and it is immediately off putting and self-defeating to the project.