Congrats! JR!

[DarkLord_Lalinc]

That's not really something that needs to be discussed on depth, I think. He enjoys JR's music more and is technically one of the best in the industry, but the other guys are legends and have struck several generations with their music, so it really comes across as something shocking that JR got the first place. DT nor JR have become "legends" and I doubt they will.

[jsem]

Chick shoulda won it. I'm not surprised JR did though..

[DarkLord_Lalinc]

lol I also reckon JR has become fairly popular lately, with his iPad stuff and 1000 endorsements.

[Hayden]

That's not really something that needs to be discussed on depth, I think. He enjoys JR's music more and is technically one of the best in the industry, but the other guys are legends and have struck several generations with their music, so it really comes across as something shocking that JR got the first place. DT nor JR have become "legends" and I doubt they will.

I just found the comment to make little logical sense. He mentioned that Jordan is both more technically [pro]ficient, and that he personally enjoys Jordan's music better. So why should these two factors be diminished or outweighed by a 'legend' status - something which is mostly achieved out of mere popularity more-so than actual proficiency and musical aptitude/ability.

The argument wasn't completely invalid, but it was just presented in a manner which, to me, came across as "Jordan is superior in both of these important areas, but he shouldn't be in this position because he's not a 'legend'." And I just found this to be poor reasoning; if somebody is going to arrive at this conclusion, then first they should elaborate upon what they're saying and at least justify it to some degree. I mean, firstly, 'legend' should have been given some sort of definition, or a different word/term should've been chosen entirely. 'Legend' is a very general word which can lend itself to a lot of different meanings, which is partially why I wasn't going to accept "[...]are legends" as being proper argument-backing material. Your explanation ("but the other guys are legends and have struck several generations with their music") is a lot better because it's actually well-explained, particular, specific, and ultimately much more of a credible justification.  

(Sorry if I'm coming across as abrasive at all (or overly serious); that's not my intention. I'm just trying to convey an opinion in a manner which is understandable, and the words I choose to articulate my thoughts effectively can often come across as sort of blunt and harsh, so sorry if that's the case.)