I would also like to be taken directly to the manhero's page when searching, if that man is the only one tagged. One less click.

I've recommended to Admin that James Marsters be removed and I think they agree. Enjoy it while it lasts, that guy is good as gone.

Admin, Please, absolutely do not remove James Marsters. There is no reason to remove him, or anyone else for that matter. He appeals to both men and women and is a wonderful human being as well as a great actor. Thank you.

No Adrien Brody?

I'm very confused. My entries for Spike and Malcolm Reynolds have both been removed! Now there are just the actors who play them. I'm sorry, but the actors are not the same as the characters! :( What gives?

Hey ritz-munchers, could you all put Gregor Mendel on the scientists list? Thanks.

he's in there.

Why has Malcom Reynolds been removed? If Han Solo AND Harrison Ford can be there, so can Nathan Fillion And Malcom Reynolds AND Bill Pardy (which I have entered for consideration) should be there.

By popular demand, we are currently in the process of reviewing lesser-known fictional characters on the site. As you know, the character of Han Solo is epic and transcendent whereas Bill Pardy and Malcolm Reynolds are relatively obscure.

Oh bull. Malcom Reynolds is not at all obscure. How could anyone who was in the top twenties be obscure.

And that was me above.

Agreed. Someone in the top twenties can't possibly be obscure. Means they're known. Means they're voted on. There's actors in the voting that are far more obscure than Malcolm Reynolds! *sigh*

Even people who haven't watched Firefly, but are fans of Joss, know who Mal Reynolds is! And why remove anybody for being obscure? If they make the list, shouldn't that be enough? Oh, and also? Mal Reynolds was named #18 in TV Guide's "Greatest Sci-fi legends" list in 2004. TV Guide certainly didn't consider him 'relatively obscure'.

New Mancrush news update.

Your entire site should be removed since it is sexist and really just stupid. If gay men can admire men's abs and such so can women (and you can quote the "urban definition" of "mancrush" all you want--I hardly consider the "urban dicitonary" an authority on anything and the fact is that this is all male homosocial/sexuality ). Why don't you just remove anything that isn't a cartoon since those are mainly what you admire anyway?

Aaaaand ... he's gone. Way to go, #1 A+ James Marsters fan who posted scores of comments under various names and undertook some sort of campaign to get him to the top of the list. You got him there. Hope you got a screenshot, cause that's all that's left.

If ONLY MEN are supposed to vote, then there must be a way to prove that you ARE a MAN before you can vote. With no proof in place, then ANYONE can vote. If ANYONE can vote, then ANY vote is legitamite. If ANY vote is legitamite, then it is obvious by the removal of James Marsters that the guy who established this little internet time waster is threatened by the idea that women can have some input and control. So, how are you going to prevent females from voting for or against other men on your site? Hmmmm? It would be easy enough to select some other guy and send him to the top and keep him there if there was the desire to do so. What are you going to do, eliminate everyone who reaches the top who doesn't meet your approval? Until you can guarantee that only MALES are voting, this whole thing is completely invalid per your supposed definition of mancrush.

quite bitching because your stupid james boy got removed. the dude's right. he never should have been on here in the first place.

Dudes. I had no idea that we were supposed to be men in order to vote. Maybe you should put that at the top of the website. Can Lesbians vote? Oh well, carry on. Men.

sexist you would be the first to complain if someone shut you out based on your private choices shame on you

it's all a joke.

#1) How does anyone from Grey's Anatomy have a positive score? #2) No love for the UFC? They all have negative scores. #3)WTH at Bruce Lee and Steve McQueen not being in the Top 10?

...an opportunity. (Sorry about the long post.)

As far as I can tell from the information on your website, there is nothing to prohibit women from voting. In an admin note of 2/28 you specifically provide information for women who may be using the site for the first time. In your note euthanizing Marsters, you specifically note that your definition of mancrush (a) seems to suggest only men are invited to vote and (b) only figures of esteem should be on the list. I respectfully submit that the first is impossible to regulate and therefore moot and the second is clearly not represented in the remaining characters. Godspeed yourselves (clearly you need some assistance from a higher authority)

boys will be boys

As a woman who votes regularly and likes to read the comments, I applaud the decision. No reason women can't vote, or gay men, or even bright chimps... just don't inundate the site with swooning and fawning over your guy. (Except Pepe LePew, whom I added.)

boys SHOULD be boys

Check out the comments for (eg) #4 Mr. Depp - clearly illustrates the hypocrisy behind the admins' justification for euthanizing Mr. Marsters

You're supposed to be a guy here to vote? This is a gay thing? I thought it was for girls. They're my mancrushes...it made sense. WTF is going on!?

it's for guys to rank their HEROES and ROLE MODELS. it is non-sexual. if you don't get it, go away.

Can women also put in a vote of non-sexual admiration for a candidate?

I am fine with having Jesus on here, but having the "Buddy Christ" is a mockery of the Catholic Faith and completely inappropriate. Please remove.

"Guy", stop being ridiculous. It is fanaticism that makes a mockery of your religion.

What's fanatic about waging wars in the name of God?

Atheist, it is easy to stand for nothing and mock those who have a purpose in life. If there was a character on here designed specifically to mock Jews or gays, would you find that acceptable?

Christian Fundamentalist, enlist some of your friends to work on this. Christians have a duty to stand of for Christ even if it means being mocked ourselves. I'd be a fool for Christ any day than to be a fool for nothing like this Atheist.

I don't find "The Wandering Jew" or "Pontius Pilot" mocking. I bet you reveled in Ann Coulter's assessment of John Edwards, but didn't find that inappropriate.

Actually, the Buddy Christ isn't just an offense to Catholics. Sorry, I misspoke. It is an offense to all Christians.

You know nothing about me, so dont make any assumptions.

There's one more vote for Buddy Christ

There's nothing like an atheist to rile up a bunch of conservatives!!

i don't think the folks at mancrush negotiate with fundamentalist. emphasis on the mental part. it's a satirical website. this means, it's a) a joke, and b) that no one is making you sit here and look at it. so, if go give yourself some lashes for the thorny crown of original sin you wear and stop being a dumbass.

i don't think the folks at mancrush negotiate with fundamentalist. emphasis on the mental part. it's a satirical website. this means, it's a) a joke, and b) that no one is making you sit here and look at it. so, if go give yourself some lashes for the thorny crown of original sin you wear and stop being a dumbass.

A self respecting person stands up for himself. Gays stand up for themselves as do Jews, Muslims, Atheists. And a self respecting Christian stands up for Christ.

Relax my friends, I think it's cool that I'm up there howabout throwing a vote my way! Your Buddy, Christ

Comment Why did Adrian Paul suddenly disappear?

Because Chris Lambert is the real Highlander.

Why is the real Highlander French?

mancrush definitions from urbandictionary.com (which accepts submissions from anyone who wishes to participate and are therefore not officially recognized by any other authority): 1. A hetrosexual man admiring another man to an extreme in a non-romantic or sexual way, more having an intense desire to be that other man. 2. The highest tier of a man's love for another man, without having any sexual want towards the man. 3. noun. an intense and usually passing infatuation from one man projected onto another; also: the object of infatuation. 5. Lingering homosexual feelings, normally towards celebrities, that manifest themselves in non-sexual discussion about the celebrities. They are non-sexual only because distance and chance of encounter are low.

Lingering homosexual feelings, normally towards celebrities, that manifest themselves in non-sexual discussion about the celebrities. They are non-sexual ONLY because distance and chance of encounter are low.

Hey Admins, according to your standards, Johnny Depp and Steve Carell must be killed off (see plethora of sexual swooning and fawning in latest comments). Guess boys really do swoon...

Admin - what happened to Nathan Fillion... yesterday he had 75 votes and today he has 5?

losergirl, who else is voting for your pretty boy actor? no one? that's what i thought

What happened to Adrian Paul? Yesterday he was ranked #15 and today is nowhere to be seen!

Why is there an anti-Christian character on here? Stop the hate.

Comment James Marsters euthanised ? You're just jealous because you can't attract the adoration of thousands of women. Losers

everyone doesn't subscribe to your xtian dogma--there can be non- or anti-xtian character on the list.

it's really funny to see these people get upset when people vote down their random dudes. let's keep it up!

there's no conspiracy people...you have to realize not everyone shares the same affections. how bout we all take it easy and have a laugh???????

You are getting bothered for nothing. Look more carefully at the picture. It is Christ as shepherd, lamb on shoulder and staff in the other hand, not "Buddy Christ" from Dogma. (Which I happen to find hilarious as a Christian, since I think it is a parody of the way too many Christians turn the faith into a commodity to sell, but that is not the point.)

What kind of standard are the Admins using to euthanize entries? James Marsters was removed because of supposed overt female voting, but if you read the comments on people such Johnny Depp, Gerard Butler, and many, many other guys it is EXTREMELY obvious they are getting female voters. Why do some guys with female voters stay and others get removed? This doesn't make sense.

Well we've covered sex and religion in the war of words on the forum so lets take it to the max. on the chance that i out my whereaboots have a look at the last ranked men of distinction #'s 1437 and down. This page for sure isn't manipulated by anyone but the voters. It's sad that these men are even on the list BUT they are not ignored, nor should they be. and once again i'd like to point out that Jack Bauer has not gone piddle, so before he dies of a burst bladder lets show him props. Pasqouli

What gives, it is obviously down to who the boy admins find 'hot'. Now that is their perogative - it is their site. Just a tad silly that they try to pretend it is something more elevated.

Oops... mea culpa. I didn't realize Buddy Christ was added... thought you were referring to the picture under Jesus Christ. Still, I am not bothered. I think it is an indictment of some contemporary trends in some Chrisitan churches, not Christianity as a whole. (And more of Protestant mega-churches than Catholicism.)

Could someone explain why some with lots of votes are suddenly removed?

Hello! Currently, we are not seeing any inconsistencies in the voting. If you notice something, please email info@mancrush.com. Thanks!

Would someone please disconnect Royal's keyboard? I think it's time for him to go to bed. Gotta get up for school in the morning.

Comment Where is Adrian Paul? He is a great looking actor with fans everywhere in the world

Admins - no inconsistencies in the votes? Way to ignore the comments about inconsistencies in your euthanizing policies. Must be politicians in real life.

Sanity, Stacey is a boys name too, you dimwit.

Yes, I get your whole Marsters vs. Mancrush.com deal. Your site, your rules. What sucks about this though is that there are still hundreds of guys listed here that have been “submitted by women with the sole purpose of voting for that man and commenting on his abs and glutes”. If you’re going to execute this rule it seems that you should play fair. Johnny Depp is continuously in the top twenty and yet he has DOZENS of comments about being one sexxxay dude. Same goes with Gerard Butler. What gives? And if this decision was brought on by the rampant comment spamming by the obsessed fangirl (and like you, I’m just assuming it was a girl), then I think you should have to take down Colbert too. A man who reached his place in most talked about with witty and engaging comments such as: one more for luck I'm hot! lol 91 92 98 and counting! At least the psycho Marsters fan put some imagination into it. I say if you’re gonna stick with your rules you best be deleting th

to finish up the rest of my comment- you best be deleting some of these guys right away. Happy voting!

Will you stop the mumbling about Marsters and tell us what happened to Adrian Paul? Admin?

Delete Delete Delete ... it must be because Eric and Sam (Admins) find those other guys 'hawt' too. Lurve is blind, eh?

I would like to thank you for approving ol' Bozzer. I couldn't quite believe that he wasn't on here already!

If you don't want women to vote repeatedly, please state a policy. Don't have a tantrum and take it out on an actor who both women and men appreciate - not you obviously, but other men. If you're going to euthanize don't be demeaning and insulting toward the individual. That's petty.

I would like to know why you removed Adrian Paul from your listing? I have admired the man for years - he is a wonderful actor a great humanitarian (if you do not believe me go check out his web site at adrianpaul.net) and has just recently been honored by the WorldWide Charitable Alliance by beeing given the Peacemaker Award. So what else is required to be included in your list?

It was perceived by those in control at Mancrush that votes and comments made by gushing females were skewing results and as a result making the site less MANcrush and more WOMANcrush. This conclusion may appear sexist but the fact is THIS SITE BELONGS TO THE GUYS AT MANCRUSH AND THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO WHAT THEY WANT! There are apparently a lot folks interested in the site or they wouldn't bother to vote. So even though Adrian Paul [recently euthanized] was my Mancrush, I extend my congrats to the Mancrush site -- It’s yours, make it what you want it to be - clearly it's working.

Where and how does one vote here?

If the site were working perfectly, then there would be no argument. However, the "guys" do not say that women shouldn't vote, they want the site to be popular. However, when women vote "wrongly," they not only euthanize the object of womanly affections, but disparage said object, who did nothing for the bad rap. (Men who appeal to women are not worthy of respect by men?) There's a dichotomy here, and it isn't for the confused users to figure out.

Their methodology may be confusing, but the fact remains that this site belongs to Mancrush and they have the right to run it how they see fit. Clearly, at this point in time, they are not concerned about losing female visitors to their site.

The methodology is... when fans begin dominating conversation with annoying drivel... euthanize. Is that more explicit? Regular users have tired of a new group of fans appearomg every week en masse to vote for one man without respect for the site. James Marsters was just the last straw. (The Butler fans have backed off, so no need to euthanize.) This woman approves.

I would like to apologize to the men who run this site and the men who legitimitly(sp?) use this site. As a female, I am deeply embarassed by the actions and words of some fellow females. It may be because I am in my 20's, but I know what a mancrush is. When I hear mancrush, I think of a man admiring another man in a non-sexual way. I'm sorry your site is being overrun by women who believe this is a hot or not contest. I'm more sorry some of these women are throwing fits when you try to tell them what this site really is. I hope the actions of these females does not ruin the reputation of the rest of us. It is interesting to see who you men have mancrushes on. Sorry again on behalf of most females.

I'm on the side of the Mancrush team, they have the right and responsibility to run the site as they see fit. But in all due respect, there is no methodology in force here. Methodology implies consistency of procedure and we’ve not seen that with the administrative euthanizations. By now most users know, or should know, what a Mancrush is and what this site is intended for. It is time to respect Mancrush for what it is (and it is great fun), and back off trying to make it into something else.

Looking at the last few posts, I feel that defenders are being unfair (especially the one claiming to speak on behalf of most females). Maybe a few women have been unrealistic, but most of the posters have been reasonable and have had a decent tone. They have brought up criticism that might be constructive taken the right way. I can see the problems of the administrators, but I think their approach to the problem was not well thought out or fairly applied. I think that to imply that most women have taken a 'hot-or-not,' approach is to insult most women. (whether it is a woman doing the insulting or not) As a female I will not vote. By voting here I feel I would skew the votes and it is interesting to see what men think. I certainly don't want to overrun it or make it into something other than what it is. I wish it well and would respect it even more if it and it's defenders respected me.

Look, some people, females by the sound of it, were obnoxious. The administrators had every right to tell them to stop. They even had the right to euthanize. However, they did not do it well. By reacting emotionally, they stooped to the level of immaturity shown by those who had offended them. By insulting the actor and making him a scapegoat, they also disrespected the sane fans of that actor, some of whom are male. I happen to think that Marsters is a very talented and interesting actor. I imagine that other fans have simply shrugged and left and are no longer trying to talk someone here into doing something decent - like recognizing their point of view. I shall go and do likewise. It just seems as though they could be bigger about this.

I totally agree.

Where's Dilbert? No one has added the quintessential computer geek/engineer yet? What a shame!

I agree that Marsters and the Buffy series has a broad appeal, but I don't see another way to make the fan hoards go away. I would suggest the "team" bring Marsters and Spike back in a few weeks, once the annoying fans lose interest. Depp might also disappear, though, I suspect Depp's one fan is someone making a point that there are others besides Marsters who deserve euthanization. Another approach might be to leave him up, but don't allow comments. One more point - I don't think the Admin is making negative comments, it is mancrush regulars or trolls. In fact, I suspect the admin enjoys the controversy, or they would put the definition of mancrush on the first page.

Should be with the other Ancients

Why not limit the comments to one per manhero per hour?

Terry Pratchet should be included in the Literature Dept. Thanks.

Should also be included in the Artists Dept.

Question Would someone explain to me who are the men that look up to Homer Simpson or even Johny Depp or Haselhof for that mater? Are those characters anyones role model?! And if not why are they in here?!

Question I would also like to understand how you decide who to euthanise?

It's obvious the site administrators don't want us to know how they decide who to euthanize because their choices are completely subjective. They have not bothered to respond to any of the recent forum messages regarding euthanizations nor to provided any explanations, other than for the euthanization of James Marsters, on their “News” page. It creates controversy and encourages visitors to the site, why explain?

looks like they are euthanizing poorly written entries now

More females swooning for Johnny Depp.....guess who's gonna be euthanized next ;)

depp is not obscure like the randoms who were rightfully removed

Comment I am sorry but no man would ever admire that Depp person

Ah yes, that makes perfect sense! Can't have a mancrush on an obscure personality now, can we? What exactly is the correlation between obscurity and what is considered as an acceptable mancrush, anyone here know?

are we still talking abuot james marsters? gross.

Comment Yes a mancrush is someone a man can admire and look upon as his hero not a guy women swoon over

So let me see if I've got this right: men cannot admire or hero worship a guy women "swoon" over? Well then, it's time for Mancrush to get busy and do some widespread euthanizing. May as well start with Depp.

In case you haven't been able to figure it out by now, the site admins only do what they feel like doing as determined by their own personal levels of crushedness and who they feel threatened by, which means their actions are done in a random, capricious, asinine way. It's obvious they themselves have a crush on Johnny Depp and they themselves do not have a crush James Marsters, hence the keeping of Depp and his rating and silly fangirl comments and the removal of Marsters. There is no consistency to their policies, as evidenced by the fact that they do NOT have a problem with women's suffrage (i.e., their previous comments indicate that females can go ahead and submit entries and can vote as much as they want AS LONG AS those entries and votes are for guys THEY approve of) and yet they get upset when women do vote.

What man in his right mind would vote for the beefcake David Hasselhoff? This guy's ratings have also just gone up, so the female brigade must be at it again. Wonder if the Admins like or dislike the Hoff and if they'll allow him to stay. Personally, I'd get rid of him pronto.

A better question is, what woman in her right mind would vote for the beefcake David Hasselhoff?

james marsters was a nobody from buffy. johnny depp gravitas transcends gender lines. he's been the star of many phenomenal films and also is very outspoken politically. quite a hero in my book.

Marsters is not a nobody. If you've ever been to sci-fi convention where he's been a guest, you'd have seen that there were lots and lots of males in attendance as well as the expected female fans. And if being politically outspoken is your qualifier, then James is right there too. He's extremely opinionated politically, as evidenced by his appearances on Politically Incorrect and a few other shows, both tv & radio. And he's a humanitarian as well. The very next day after his Spike role was over, he had his hair shaved off on national television so it could be auctioned off for charity. The guy is a real man. Trust me on this.

Honestly, the ONLY reason for ANYONE to vote for Hasselhoff is to see if the site Admins have ANY integrity whatsoever. So far, my guess is that they don't.

hoff's a stud. why the hate?

There you go LOL You have hit the nail on the head with your post LOL This here site is suposed to be about men other men can admire and you tell me what is there that is admirable about "your" hoff

So the site Admins have no problems with beefcake studmuffins like Hasselhoff or charming studmuffins like Depp, but do have issues with charming studmuffins like Marsters. Okee dokee. That makes no sense whatsover.

Comment They also have a problem with a great actor, humanitarian and man worth admiration by every one as Adrian Paul is. So I wish someone would find it worth their while explaining this to me

Okay, Adrian Paul has been re-added to the list. Can we please give the Mancrush bashing a rest?

The bashing will end when the arbitrary nature of Mancrush ends. Reinstate James Marsters and not remove him later if he does well again. That will be the acid test.

It's time Owen Wilson was added to the site.

It's not fair...why did you people have to remove Spike and Malcolm Reynolds? ;_; They're both so cool!

And Andrew Wells is gone too! ;O; All of my Josslicious characters are being tossed!

C'mon hit the nail on the head.

You're allowed to have a mancrush on the spaghetti monster but not James Marsters (to use a common example)? er, right... The rules are contradictory and make so sense whatsoever. This site has no integrity.

Its all a Calvin Ballgame. The rules change whenever they want to change them.

i think it's really straightforward and you chicks are still bitter about your buffy beau

James Marsters is not a nobody, he is an actor and a musician and a name many people recognise. He should be allowed back onto the list - but without all the cr*p that accompanied him last time. If it happens again just delete the messages.

the followers of james marsters sinned in disrespecting this site, and for that he was euthanized. he is a modern day internet jesus, although i do not see him rising again, it's been almost a week already.

So, the many girly comments and high voting for Johnny Depp are NOT a problem, even after the James Marsters thing? And the rise of David Hasselhoff is NOT a problem? It is all too terribly obvious that TPTB are totally random, arbitrary, and, as Hobbes put it, Calvinball about their rules. They keep who THEY like and they delete who THEY don't like, regardless of what their supposed rules indicate. They apply their rules capriciously and without integrity. That's the issue. If there is a standard, then it should apply EQUALLY to everyone, not just here and there according to whim or their personal preference. Because, even if it is their website, if it's all about their own personal preferences, then the website should be available only to them and not to the public. HYPOCRITES. That's what they are.

Hi, nice site! <a href= http://freeanalsex.lll1l.info >anal sex</a> [URL=http://freeanalsex.lll1l.info]anal sex[/URL]

Since when is an actor and a musician someone worth admiration?

Well, let's see, first of all, there are lots and lots of actors and musicians listed on this site, which must mean that lots and lots of people admire actors and musicians. Second, many actors and musicians have used their art and their talents to bring important issues and messages to the masses, whether through the films/shows they participate in or the songs/albums they put out or through the platform their celebrity provides by speaking out and/or by supporting charities or other groups. Seems to me that there is plenty of reason to admire anyone, including actors and musicians, who use their talents for good or who promote worthy causes. And gee, Adrian Paul, Gerard Butler, James Marsters, Bono, etc., all fall into that category.

shut it, please.

Oh, my. How very erudite of you. "shut it, please."??? So, since you have absolutely no sensible argument to present, you show off your total ignorance with that pithy reply. I'm so very impressed. Loser. Oh, and btw, if there was only a lone Marsters proponent, then he wouldn't have been voted up to #1 and TPTB at this site wouldn't have been so threatened.

Well I must clarify (although all those girly posts make me want to throw up) Adrian Paul is a humanitarian, his charity has helped numerous poor children everywhere and he is the winner of the medal for Peace so he deffinitely worth admiration as much as those others are not and never will be

First, there is a history here, and your ignoring/ignorance of that context is what ticks folks off. Depp is original content and has been in the top 30 or so for much of the history of the site. Butler, Armitage, Marsters, and some earlier soap actors suddenly shot up as they were linked from fan sites. Granted, that happened in other cases, including Stewart and Colbert, but comments were in keeping with the satirical nature of the site. Second, you can't put this all the "powers that be." There has been popular irritation with the fan hoards. Admin was responding and are not usually the ones defending the site. (Never met them myself.) Three, I suspect the recent inundation of "Depp is hot" comments were made by one person trying to indirectly support Marster's case. thrty or more appeared in a couple hours. Still, I would support bringing Spike back in a few weeks, as I have said.

This is a silly site. Go away if you don't like it. Appeals to "integrity" suggest you take this way too seriously. Nothing wrong with Calvin ball! (Especially when trying to deal with new problems as they arise.)

that every time someone doesn't agree with another poster, they call them a girl. And that the term girly is thrown around like an insult. The gender of a poster can not been ascertained until the poster themselves has confirmed it for one thing, for another- lay off the misogyny.

The owners of the site frequently claim to have integrity, ie stating that lusty comments compromise the 'integrity' of the site.

1. History: You're saying that fanbase for political comedians such as the Daily Show guys is okay but fanbase for others is not. Ummmm, that lacks in common sense. 2. Fan hoards: When you set out to rank all the guys in the universe you should expect the fans and the detractors of said guys in the universe to respond, especially after one gets one's manfan site noticed by the media; you should then expect media related response. And if you don't want media related response, then keep your website private and locked so it won't attract the rest of the world. Otherwise, the rest of the world is invited to participate and if they are invited to participate, then their responses should be allowed to remain. 3. The rash of Depp comments may or may not have been done to call attention to the lack of consistency to what causes one person to get pulled and yet doesn't affect another. But it certainly does make that point, doesn't it.

Any integrity this site had (debatable) went out the window as soon as one of the co-founders of mancrush became a candidate to vote for. Self-publicising is obviously okay. Or maybe that's the only way for him to pretend anyone likes him.....

Well, let's all just show ole Eric Vecchione how well we do/n't like him and his debatable integrity.

then just email them. i've emailed them twice about things and they always respond promptly. Frankly though, just give it up. THE WHOLE SITE IS A JOKE. ENJOY IT

1. No lack of common sense here. Some fan bases are more in keeping with the site's character.... Daily Show fans appreciate the satire and snarky humor, and don't confuse "crush" with "mancrush." Many, not all Marsters fans do the opposite. Even appeals like "but he's a humanitarian as well as a hunk" demonstrate the writer misses the satire. So yes, they are different. 2. It is true that the Admin appeal to "integrity," but clearly that is tongue in cheek. SATIRE was/is the dominant character of the site. True, they opened it up to whomever comes, but don't have an obligation to run the site your way. (In fact they might even be construed as having an obligation to try to keep the focus on mancrushes.) 3. No, it shows you can't equate Marsters and Depp. I acknowledge that there is inconsistency, but the powers are responding to new issues as they come and as the site grows. (And Aristotle, my main mancrush, would call that the virtue of prudence. Consistency is

Oops... that ended: Consistency is not necessarily integrity. Can't believe I am wasting time on this. QUICK I need some snarky humor!

You want snarky humor? Try Spike! He was a master at snarkiness. And James Marsters, who played Spike, was a master at delivering snarky comments. In real life, too.

I think it's a little odd that some people here can recognize The Daily Show and The Colbert Report as satire, but not Buffy: The Vampire Slayer. The show is called Buffy: The Vampire Slayer, for Christ’s sake. If it weren't at least somewhat tongue-in-cheek, it would probably suck.

This site is obviously fixed as I sat and watched overnight many entries such as Terry Tate being the most obvious gain over 100 plus votes in the space of five hours-while those who were rated from position 40 to 60 either remained where they were or dropped significantly. I doubt very seriously that over 75 different people stayed up all night to vote-I work overnight and had the site on to monitor to pass the time. Shame on the moderators for misleading those who vote honestly into thinking that the vote results are true.

When I stated 75 different people being up overnight, I was referring to all that supposedly voted for Terry Tate.

I have to agree with anon-it seems that certain football players got a big boost within a few hours (Tom Brady, Brett Favre) while other people who were in the upper part of the top 50 positions received more than the usual down votes. I agree there can't be that many people voting overnight-even those on the west coast would not give that many votes to Brady or Favre. The site does seem to be vastly inconsistent from day to day.

someone doesn't like the top 20. in case you haven't noticed, many more people use the site than just yourself. So, IT IS POSSIBLE, JUST MAYBE...WAIT...WAIT...THAT OTHER PEOPLE ARE VOTING! WOW! WHAT A REVELATION! GET A LIFE!

I, too was up overnight at work and voted each hour-not Terry Tate-the person I voted for was consistently in the top 50 for a month now-everytime I voted for this person-three votes came down against him in the same hour which was very unusual given the track record for other nights-so his down vote was 18 overall last night. It seems that the listings are indeed skewed to favor certain people even though you vote against them everyday-they seem to garner double the votes. Now I know why the "Pop Candy" column on USA Today stated that those in the Top Ten were rather strange picks.

It's not that we don't LIKE the top 20-it just seems that the results are very inconsistent to what may be actually people are voting. Yes I agree there are those who vote overnight but the wide disparity for five hours certainly raises more than a few eyebrows.

Hello all. We've taken a look through the logs and are not seeing any inconsistencies in the voting. If anyone is still concerned about the status of any man please email info@mancrush.com for a copy of the voting log. Thanks!

I personally believe that only one person per day can garner an up or down choice for each person on the site-then they are locked out from voting for 24 hours-like the down vote. I'm certain the standings would be far different-that is if all started with zero votes.

The offer of looking at the "log" is all well and good but doesn't mean much-what would be better is a plus/minus rating for the day beside each entrant so the "voter" can see what the daily changes actually are for each participant.

Given that the nature of this site is so arbitrary in the voting process (I for one would like to have the users be registered before voting)-one can easily get around the system or rules of voting by being in a location that houses a lot of computers-ie a computer room on a college campus-or in a dormitory-one can easily vote numerous times for or against a person. If one is registered and has a limited number of total votes per day (5-10 for or against), questions concerning the voting would be more limited. I do like the above suggestion of a daily plus/minus total per entrant.

I agree Buffy and Spike are satire... I like the show. The point is not whether the show is satire, but the nature of the comments about Marsters and the attitude of the fan hoards.

I agree with 'your name' above...only registered users should be allowed to vote AND only registered users should be allowed to comment. Anonymous comments about a user's choices or the sexual dalliances or preference of the mancrush are bullshit. Only cowards hit and run anonymously.

Re Hammer: As well as apparent stoners/slackers/students with a few spare hours (oh wait, that's stoners again! ;^) juuuust kidding) who just want to see their (creative) names on a website. Makes 'em feel special. Otherwise I prolly wouldn't mind seeing the completely bizarre comments wiped off, the ones that have nothing to do with the subject being commented on (i.e: Buddha & Hitler entries). But nothing else, cuz even the haters, however odious, have a right to voice an opinion. Cheers!

After reading certain comments posted today when I stumbled upon this site this evening, I personally think voting for someone is a huge waste of time. Say you vote for one person six times during the day-which if done by the rules will take 6 hours at the least-all of which can be wiped out within minutes. Unless the person you're voting for is in the so-called top 20 with a bit of a gap or distance between people more than likely your vote will be canceled out by others within the hour. And no I haven't voted and certainly don't intend to Plus seeing some of the ludicrous choices as entries ("Spaghetti Monster")-the whole site loses its credibility as being worthwhile. Just a passing thought while leaving in going to better things to occupy time.

well someone's a little salty. goodbye and goodriddance.

The Men Pending section is getting a little long and some of them have been there for quite a while. Seems to me the Admins should get around to narrowing the list, either by adding those guys or euthanizing them. At the very least, they can reduce the list by removing the duplicate entries (at least 3 or 4 guys are there twice each).

Some comments, the recent Hitler additions especially, are exceedingly offensive. They should be deleted. If some "fan" is trying to increase Hitler's standing in the Most Talked About, as has been done for several other guys, the comments should at least be decent or clever or reasonably non-vulgar and disgusting.

Holy lord, you'd think this was a cathouse with all the teenage style bitching. Gentelmen and Ladies, let us just enjoy the game.

what happened to mappi mapsson???

Thanks for the assurance that the comments abuses will be addressed. That's really good news. Hopefully it also means you will reinstate the much maligned James Marsters and allow him to once again "join the only ranked index of every man in the history of the universe" since his absence will mean it does NOT properly rank every man of note. (After all, look at what he stirred up on your site!)

Has anyone else noticed that sometimes when you vote either up or down the vote registers, but the number next to the name does not change.......Whilst I accept that I may not be the only person on line at that time, this is happening more and more, so the chances of 2 people voting for the same person, one plus one minus at exactly the same time are pretty remote!!!!!!!

How are people's "Top 10" determined? I voted Pol Pot up once by mistake. I voted him down lots of times. He's in my Top 10. How did that happen?

Each person determines his/her own top ten list. To change your top ten, simply click "Edit My Profile" in the top left of your profile page. If you have any trouble please email info@mancrush.com. Thanks!

that just happened to me too. I voted someone up, but their -2 remained a -2. I checked the top of the screen and it showed my + vote but no corresponding - vote.

Well it has happen again today 3 times on 3 different people........and so far silence from admin, even to the email I sent them???????? should we be concerned, or is this just a little game the admin like to play????? Is this their way of telling us the whole thing is rigged????

Hello all. We've checked through the voting logs and are not seeing any inconsistencies in the tally. If you are still concerned please email info@mancrush.com with the name of the man you are voting for and the exact time of vote and we will investigate for you. Thanks!

Eric, as per your request I have sent you and email with the details for the crazy way things are right now, people with +42 lower down than +39 and +38 This time how about an email reply?????? Still waiting for the first one to be replied too.

To: Slightlyconcerned. Don't worry too much about delayed updates on the + and - rankings. From my (non-scientific) observations, it appears that sometimes the site gets more votes than it can update instaneously and on occasion takes a couple minutes to make all the adjustments. My guess is that as the site gets more popular and more and more men get added to the listing, it will take longer and longer for the updates to occur unless the Admins decide to fork over add'l moolah to pay for more processing power. Of course, it's also possible I have no idea what I'm talking about since I is just a participant like you is. Oh, and, I like that people now have to be signed in to post, but I'm kinda sad that it means we can no longer change our submission names to snarkily respond to previous posters.

why isnt bobby lee on this site

Why did you not approve Severus Snape to the list? He is my hero!

Why did you euthanize Severus Snape? You can find Harry Potter and even Draco Malfoy here for God's sake!

Hello, Your site is great. Regards, Valintino Guxxi