Rapper Ranking Project: Rapper #3 - Tupac

[The Lonious Monk]

He just tells a story in different way but it's still just as vivid in my head when I listen. Pac's storytelling >>> Biggie... Only rappers who are better at this to me are Nas and Ghostface

I think the confusion here is why he gets a lower score. It's not because he doesn't tell stories as well as Biggie or others when he does. It's because relevant to the vast amount of songs he has out there, stories don't really make up a very big percentage. The subject matter is pretty limited (just like with Biggie although not quite as bad). And his stories are pretty standard. He doesn't really take many chances with the subject matter or method of delivery. That's why I gave him a 3. His stories are great, but when you take his body of work and compare it to that of a truly great storyteller like Nas or Ghost, it doesn't really measure up.

What are you talking about? There's storytelling in mostly all his songs. Tupac and limited subject matter don't go together

Dog we aren't talking about him dropping 6 or 7 lines of narrative in a three verse song. That's what ya'll don't get. That's not strong storytelling. We're talking about a rappers ability to carry a narrative through a song or even a verse. You guys keep wanting to throw out these songs that largely aren't stories as examples of his storytelling just because like 10% of the song actually has some narrative elements. The storytelling in songs like that is nothing compared to songs where there is a full blown narrative that is expertly carried throughout the whole song.

And Tupac's storytelling subject matter is somewhat limited. It's all typically based in black struggle, which is a good topic, but it's still a pretty isolated lane. Again, look at someone like Ghostface who is a legit 5 storyteller. The nigga could go from telling a story about being on the run after shooting someone in the face to telling a story about a barber fucking up his haircut to telling a story about going undersea and fucking with a city of mermaids. Like that's not exaggeration. Those are actual stories in his catalog. Compare the breadth of that subject matter to Pac's subject matter. Or take someone like Nas who is rapping stories in reverse or telling a story from the perspective of a bullet. Now compare that creativity in storytelling to Pac who basically tells every story in the same way. If rappers like Nas and Ghost are the standard for a 5 in Storytelling, it should be easy to see why Pac isn't there.

 

[5 Grand]

Nah, Pac is definitely an excellent story teller. Yall tripping

So name some stories he told

Other that's not mentioned

Violent

Soulja story

Dopefiends diner

16 on death row

Case of the missing mic

Wonder why they call you bitch

But none really stacks up the other legends stories

I'll give those songs a listen, but those aren't his most popular songs.

 

[Soloman_The_Wise]

ob·jec·tive

əbˈjektiv/

adjective

adjective: objective

1.

(of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.

"historians try to be objective and impartial"

synonyms: impartial, unbiased, unprejudiced, nonpartisan, disinterested, neutral, uninvolved, even-handed, equitable, fair, fair-minded, just, open-minded, dispassionate, detached, neutral

So if you see that definition, you should know why what you guys are saying has nothing to do with objectivity.

One person can be objective (the definition itself is specific to a single person). All objectivity means is that the decisions are made based on facts and not opinions. The whole reason I broke it into categories and had defined scoring guidelines is to reduce the subjectivity needed to produce scores. When I decided whether to change a score or not, it had nothing to do with my opinion on the person's argument. The only thing I considered was whether or not the argument was in line with the rules of the topic. Again, I made changes even when, in my opinion, the person was wrong. I did that because I was being objective. If I was being a dictator like @GetoBoy keeps claiming, I would have only made a change if I agreed with what a poster said.

That said, what he says here:

One person tryna control all the ratings is the worse way to do a rating system is what it all boils down to... Nothing is truly objective when one person is the sole judge jury and executioner of everything... It would be like a judge hearing a case from everybody making the final ruling then when they try to appeal the ruling they appealing to the same judge that made the ruling in the first place everybody gotta make their case to you then you make the final ruling then if we appeal we gotta appeal to you about your own ruling..... Ain't nothing about that objective sorry

is not about objectivity. He doesn't seem to know what that word means. However, it is a fair point. There is no appeal process in this topic. So if I shoot down someone's suggestion, there is no way to get a second ruling. However, what he seems to not understand is me ruling on something is supposed to be the last ditch effort for consensus. If the topic worked the way I intended and wrote up in the instructions, you guys would be the one determining whether a change was made by using the reactions to agree or disagree with arguments. If there was a majority agreement between the people active in the topic, I would change the score. It just didn't work out that way, so I usually had to wind up making a decision, and even then, before I made a decision I constantly asked if anyone had any insight they wanted to offere, but no one ever responded. So again, he keeps accusing me of being a dictator largely because a) he doesn't know what the word "objective" means and b) he doesn't understand how the topic was supposed to work and how people aren't even trying to exercise the power they have in the topic.

All that Said and Done one way to insure a higher degree of Objectivity is to average out the votes. I would never say one person cannot be objective but with the dynamics of this site and the whole point of a message board the Law of Averages removes another layer from any criticism because it incorporates multiple individuals objectivity. Without using an averaging process it is simply your Objective opinion and whatever factors may have influenced your thought process...

 

[Jonah 2.0]

He just tells a story in different way but it's still just as vivid in my head when I listen. Pac's storytelling >>> Biggie... Only rappers who are better at this to me are Nas and Ghostface

I think the confusion here is why he gets a lower score. It's not because he doesn't tell stories as well as Biggie or others when he does. It's because relevant to the vast amount of songs he has out there, stories don't really make up a very big percentage.

So the score isn't based on his actual story telling ability but on the percentage of his catalog that can be considered story telling?

 

[The Lonious Monk]

He just tells a story in different way but it's still just as vivid in my head when I listen. Pac's storytelling >>> Biggie... Only rappers who are better at this to me are Nas and Ghostface

I think the confusion here is why he gets a lower score. It's not because he doesn't tell stories as well as Biggie or others when he does. It's because relevant to the vast amount of songs he has out there, stories don't really make up a very big percentage.

So the score isn't based on his actual story telling ability but on the percentage of his catalog that can be considered story telling?

It's based on all the following:

Ability to hold a cohesive narrative

Detail of stories

Clarity of stories

Body of work

Variety of story subjects

Creativity displayed in stories

The problem is that Pac is really good in some of those areas and just OK in others. That's why he doesn't deserve a 5 or even a 4 in my opinion.

 

[Soloman_The_Wise]

He just tells a story in different way but it's still just as vivid in my head when I listen. Pac's storytelling >>> Biggie... Only rappers who are better at this to me are Nas and Ghostface

I think the confusion here is why he gets a lower score. It's not because he doesn't tell stories as well as Biggie or others when he does. It's because relevant to the vast amount of songs he has out there, stories don't really make up a very big percentage.

So the score isn't based on his actual story telling ability but on the percentage of his catalog that can be considered story telling?

It's based on all the following:

Ability to hold a cohesive narrative

Detail of stories

Clarity of stories

Body of work

Variety of story subjects

Creativity displayed in stories

The problem is that Pac is really good in some of those areas and just OK in others. That's why he doesn't deserve a 5 or even a 4 in my opinion.

In this lies the issue most are having because even Though you may feel your opinion is objective it is still your opinion and view on objectivity that is based on your worldview and understandings. The average takes into account that opinion components and makes its impact nominal as it objectively looks past ones worldview to find a center road that each facet related to a perception is connected to...

 

[GetoBoy]

He just tells a story in different way but it's still just as vivid in my head when I listen. Pac's storytelling >>> Biggie... Only rappers who are better at this to me are Nas and Ghostface

I think the confusion here is why he gets a lower score. It's not because he doesn't tell stories as well as Biggie or others when he does. It's because relevant to the vast amount of songs he has out there, stories don't really make up a very big percentage.

So the score isn't based on his actual story telling ability but on the percentage of his catalog that can be considered story telling?

It's based on all the following:

Ability to hold a cohesive narrative

Detail of stories

Clarity of stories

Body of work

Variety of story subjects

Creativity displayed in stories

The problem is that Pac is really good in some of those areas and just OK in others. That's why he doesn't deserve a 5 or even a 4 in my opinion.

In this lies the issue most are having because even Though you may feel your opinion is objective it is still your opinion and view on objectivity that is based on your worldview and understandings. The average takes into account that opinion components and makes its impact nominal as it objectively looks past ones worldview to find a center road that each facet related to a perception is connected to...

Exactly that's all I'm tryna say his rating might very well be an objective rating but the overall rating for the rapper isn't as objective becuz it's mainly based around his views

 

[The Lonious Monk]

All that Said and Done one way to insure a higher degree of Objectivity is to average out the votes. I would never say one person cannot be objective but with the dynamics of this site and the whole point of a message board the Law of Averages removes another layer from any criticism because it incorporates multiple individuals objectivity. Without using an averaging process it is simply your Objective opinion and whatever factors may have influenced your thought process...

This is wrong for two very obvious reasons. The Law of Averages applies to situations where the outcomes are equally likely like the flip of a coin or the roll of die. For it to apply to this situation, you'd have to assume that biased positive scores are equally likely to biased negative scores, that when you apply the average they would cancel each other out and the relatively objective scores would win out. There is no reason to believe that is the case. In fact when you look at what's happened in the three topics so far, we know for a fact it's not true. There have been plenty of "So and So is the GOAT, he gets all 5s." There haven't been any "So and So is wack, he gets all 3s" as far as I've seen. So clearly, the fanboyish post are more likely than the hater posts.

The second reason is actually more damning. Even if all outcomes in this case were likely, the Law of Averages specifically applies to large sample sets. In each of these topics we have gotten 20 or less sets of scores, that's not a large sample, certainly not large enough to eliminate the effect of large outliers. Once again, a simple average is not a good way of dealing with a skewed data set.

 

[The Lonious Monk]

All that Said and Done one way to insure a higher degree of Objectivity is to average out the votes. I would never say one person cannot be objective but with the dynamics of this site and the whole point of a message board the Law of Averages removes another layer from any criticism because it incorporates multiple individuals objectivity. Without using an averaging process it is simply your Objective opinion and whatever factors may have influenced your thought process...

This is wrong for two very obvious reasons. The Law of Averages applies to situations where the outcomes are equally likely like the flip of a coin or the roll of die. For it to apply to this situation, you'd have to assume that biased positive scores are equally likely to biased negative scores, that when you apply the average they would cancel each other out and the relatively objective scores would win out. There is no reason to believe that is the case. In fact when you look at what's happened in the three topics so far, we know for a fact it's not true. There have been plenty of "So and So is the GOAT, he gets all 5s." There haven't been any "So and So is wack, he gets all 3s" as far as I've seen. So clearly, the fanboyish post are more likely than the hater posts.

The second reason is actually more damning. Even if all outcomes in this case were likely, the Law of Averages specifically applies to large sample sets. In each of these topics we have gotten 20 or less sets of scores, that's not a large sample, certainly not large enough to eliminate the effect of large outliers. Once again, a simple average is not a good way of dealing with a skewed data set. We can do this all day man. About 40% of what I do at work is statistical analysis and another 20% is serving on technical review boards. This is how I know that a lot of this ya'll are suggesting is now how things are done when you're trying to objective assess something.

In this lies the issue most are having because even Though you may feel your opinion is objective it is still your opinion and view on objectivity that is based on your worldview and understandings. The average takes into account that opinion components and makes its impact nominal as it objectively looks past ones worldview to find a center road that each facet related to a perception is connected to...

I've always admitted there is a small level of judgement call here that is going to require some subjectivity. My point has been that you can't eliminate that through an average or a panel of people. It's always going to be there. And again, my purpose was never to judge anything, only to moderate. However, if no one is going to vote, then I had to make a judgement, and I just myself better to be objective than people who come in here saying that a rapper is their favorite rapper.

 

[Beta]

All these paragraphs start the next fucking thread man lol

 

[The Lonious Monk]

Holla @Sion or @GetoBoy. One of them is supposed to take it over.

 

[Beta]

Holla @Sion or @GetoBoy. One of them is supposed to take it over.

Your ovaries are showing this YOUR shit

 

[The Lonious Monk]

Holla @Sion or @GetoBoy. One of them is supposed to take it over.

Your ovaries are showing this YOUR shit

lol WTF? It is my shit, which means I reserve the right to walk away from the shit. It ain't that serious. I only do anything on the IC as long as it interests me. There's no point in doing the shit if 50% of the posts are going to be niggas bitching because their favorite rapper didn't get the score they wanted. If these niggas got such a problem with my way, let them do it their way. I'll participate on the same level as everyone else.

 

[raheemclassick]

Here are 10 philanthropic facts, you may have not known about Tupac Shakur:

1. TUPAC & JOSHUA

In 1993, Tupac received a letter from the parents of a dying boy, named Joshua. They said it was Joshua’s last wish to meet Tupac. Tupac flew to Maryland to meet Joshua and took him to a basketball game. Soon after Joshua’s death Tupac renamed his publishing company from Ghetto Gospel Music to Joshua’s Dream.

2. TUPAC’S CELEBRITY YOUTH FOOTBALL LEAGUE

Before his death, Tupac was in the works of developing a Celebrity Youth Football League. Each celebrity involved would sponsor a youth sports team, by buying uniforms and hiring a staff of coaches.

3. A PLACE CALLED HOME

Tupac put together a benefit concert to help a growing non-profit organization, A Place Called Home, raise money for a new building. Founded in 1993, A Place Called Home is a safe haven in South Central LA where at risk youth are empowered to take ownership of the quality and direction of their lives through programs in education.
http://www.apch.org/

4. TUPAC’S SPECIAL BBQ

Through his bodyguard, Tupac heard about a 14-year old girl who was paralyzed from the waist down and confined to a wheelchair after a terrible car accident. Tupac called the Make-A-Wish Foundation to inquire about this little girl. During the phone call, Pac learned the girl was scheduled to meet her celebrity idol, but the celebrity canceled just before the meeting date. Tupac stepped in and flew the girl and her aunt to California to join him on the set of “Gridlock’d.”

Afterwards he took them to the recording studio and later hosted a personal BBQ cookout at his house in honor of her.

Tupac later donated a brand new audio system to her school.

5. TUPAC GOES TO THE PROM

A Tupac fan wrote a letter to his fan club, asking the late rapper to be her prom date. About a month later, Tupac showed up at her doorstep. He came inside the home and talked to her family and offered to purchase her prom dress & escort her to the dance. Before leaving her home, Tupac gave the family $1500.

When her prom day came, Tupac arrived in a limo to pick up his fan. At the school function Tupac signed autographs, took photos, and even got on the dance floor with her for five songs before he left.

6. TUPAC RACES TO THE EMERGENCY ROOM

During a promo tour stop in Washington, DC, as Tupac was on his way back to the airport, he heard on the radio about a young girl who was in the emergency room after being attacked and mauled by a dog. Tupac told the driver to turn around and take him to the hospital where the young girl was located. He stayed with her and her family until she fully recovered.

7. TUPAC STARTS PETITION TO KEEP COMMUNITY CENTER OPEN

In his early teens, Tupac solicited people to sign a petition to keep a community recreation center open. After accumulating a significant number of signatures the building was torn down anyway in spite of his efforts. This experience helped cultivate Tupac’s vision for a center that would provide a positive environment where young people could learn skills and performing arts. He wanted to call the center Thug Mansion. After his early death, his mother maintained the vision by opening the Tupac Amaru Shakur Foundation in Stone Mountain, Georgia.

8. PUSHED UNITY BEYOND SO-CALLED EAST COAST/WEST COAST BEEF

Tupac was often accused of instigating war between coasts, but there’s plenty evidence to the contrary. In 1996, Pac invited the Boot Camp Clik, the Brooklyn Hip-Hop collective, to record The One Nation album at his summer mansion. The album has never been released, but the effort was definitely there before his death. Furthermore, Pac had rock solid relationships with East Coast folks like Busta Rhymes and Treach from Naughty By Nature. Not exactly philanthropy, but definitely for the greater good.

9. TUPAC’S PARTNERSHIP WITH J COLE

He may not be here in the flesh, but his work continues on.

The Tupac Amaru Shakur Foundation and J Cole’s Dreamville Foundation recently joined forces and started a youth book club in North Carolina. The first book read and discussed was, A Rose that Grew from Concrete. Tupac’s non-profit organization recently celebrated 15 years of serving the community. The center teaches vocal training, ballet, jazz, recording & engineering, theater and creative writing. The nonprofit is still spearheaded by Afeni Shakur. Other family members including Tupac’s sister are active volunteers and staff.

10. TUPAC’S C.O.D.E FOUNDATION

From June 1994 to April 2002, Ms. Erica Ford ran Tupac’s Code Foundation even after the rapper had passed away. Erica, Tupac, and his stepfather Mutulu Shakur, established The Code in 1994. The mission was simply to keep young people out of jail and to decrease “Black on Black” crime.

TO DONATE TO THE TUPAC AMARU FOUNDATION PLEASE VISIT:
http://www.crowdrise.com/TupacAmaruShakurFoundation

You forgot to mention that Tupac could walk on water and part the seas

I'm just showing people the difference between A sayer, and A doer"

Clearly 2pac said A lot.

 

[Soloman_The_Wise]

All that Said and Done one way to insure a higher degree of Objectivity is to average out the votes. I would never say one person cannot be objective but with the dynamics of this site and the whole point of a message board the Law of Averages removes another layer from any criticism because it incorporates multiple individuals objectivity. Without using an averaging process it is simply your Objective opinion and whatever factors may have influenced your thought process...

This is wrong for two very obvious reasons. The Law of Averages applies to situations where the outcomes are equally likely like the flip of a coin or the roll of die. For it to apply to this situation, you'd have to assume that biased positive scores are equally likely to biased negative scores, that when you apply the average they would cancel each other out and the relatively objective scores would win out. There is no reason to believe that is the case. In fact when you look at what's happened in the three topics so far, we know for a fact it's not true. There have been plenty of "So and So is the GOAT, he gets all 5s." There haven't been any "So and So is wack, he gets all 3s" as far as I've seen. So clearly, the fanboyish post are more likely than the hater posts.

The second reason is actually more damning. Even if all outcomes in this case were likely, the Law of Averages specifically applies to large sample sets. In each of these topics we have gotten 20 or less sets of scores, that's not a large sample, certainly not large enough to eliminate the effect of large outliers. Once again, a simple average is not a good way of dealing with a skewed data set.

All that Said and Done one way to insure a higher degree of Objectivity is to average out the votes. I would never say one person cannot be objective but with the dynamics of this site and the whole point of a message board the Law of Averages removes another layer from any criticism because it incorporates multiple individuals objectivity. Without using an averaging process it is simply your Objective opinion and whatever factors may have influenced your thought process...

This is wrong for two very obvious reasons. The Law of Averages applies to situations where the outcomes are equally likely like the flip of a coin or the roll of die. For it to apply to this situation, you'd have to assume that biased positive scores are equally likely to biased negative scores, that when you apply the average they would cancel each other out and the relatively objective scores would win out. There is no reason to believe that is the case. In fact when you look at what's happened in the three topics so far, we know for a fact it's not true. There have been plenty of "So and So is the GOAT, he gets all 5s." There haven't been any "So and So is wack, he gets all 3s" as far as I've seen. So clearly, the fanboyish post are more likely than the hater posts.

The second reason is actually more damning. Even if all outcomes in this case were likely, the Law of Averages specifically applies to large sample sets. In each of these topics we have gotten 20 or less sets of scores, that's not a large sample, certainly not large enough to eliminate the effect of large outliers. Once again, a simple average is not a good way of dealing with a skewed data set. We can do this all day man. About 40% of what I do at work is statistical analysis and another 20% is serving on technical review boards. This is how I know that a lot of this ya'll are suggesting is now how things are done when you're trying to objective assess something.

In this lies the issue most are having because even Though you may feel your opinion is objective it is still your opinion and view on objectivity that is based on your worldview and understandings. The average takes into account that opinion components and makes its impact nominal as it objectively looks past ones worldview to find a center road that each facet related to a perception is connected to...

I've always admitted there is a small level of judgement call here that is going to require some subjectivity. My point has been that you can't eliminate that through an average or a panel of people. It's always going to be there. And again, my purpose was never to judge anything, only to moderate. However, if no one is going to vote, then I had to make a judgement, and I just myself better to be objective than people who come in here saying that a rapper is their favorite rapper.

law of av·er·ag·es

noun

noun: law of averages

the principle that supposes most future events are likely to balance any past deviation from a presumed average.

 

[The Lonious Monk]

All that Said and Done one way to insure a higher degree of Objectivity is to average out the votes. I would never say one person cannot be objective but with the dynamics of this site and the whole point of a message board the Law of Averages removes another layer from any criticism because it incorporates multiple individuals objectivity. Without using an averaging process it is simply your Objective opinion and whatever factors may have influenced your thought process...

This is wrong for two very obvious reasons. The Law of Averages applies to situations where the outcomes are equally likely like the flip of a coin or the roll of die. For it to apply to this situation, you'd have to assume that biased positive scores are equally likely to biased negative scores, that when you apply the average they would cancel each other out and the relatively objective scores would win out. There is no reason to believe that is the case. In fact when you look at what's happened in the three topics so far, we know for a fact it's not true. There have been plenty of "So and So is the GOAT, he gets all 5s." There haven't been any "So and So is wack, he gets all 3s" as far as I've seen. So clearly, the fanboyish post are more likely than the hater posts.

The second reason is actually more damning. Even if all outcomes in this case were likely, the Law of Averages specifically applies to large sample sets. In each of these topics we have gotten 20 or less sets of scores, that's not a large sample, certainly not large enough to eliminate the effect of large outliers. Once again, a simple average is not a good way of dealing with a skewed data set.

All that Said and Done one way to insure a higher degree of Objectivity is to average out the votes. I would never say one person cannot be objective but with the dynamics of this site and the whole point of a message board the Law of Averages removes another layer from any criticism because it incorporates multiple individuals objectivity. Without using an averaging process it is simply your Objective opinion and whatever factors may have influenced your thought process...

This is wrong for two very obvious reasons. The Law of Averages applies to situations where the outcomes are equally likely like the flip of a coin or the roll of die. For it to apply to this situation, you'd have to assume that biased positive scores are equally likely to biased negative scores, that when you apply the average they would cancel each other out and the relatively objective scores would win out. There is no reason to believe that is the case. In fact when you look at what's happened in the three topics so far, we know for a fact it's not true. There have been plenty of "So and So is the GOAT, he gets all 5s." There haven't been any "So and So is wack, he gets all 3s" as far as I've seen. So clearly, the fanboyish post are more likely than the hater posts.

The second reason is actually more damning. Even if all outcomes in this case were likely, the Law of Averages specifically applies to large sample sets. In each of these topics we have gotten 20 or less sets of scores, that's not a large sample, certainly not large enough to eliminate the effect of large outliers. Once again, a simple average is not a good way of dealing with a skewed data set. We can do this all day man. About 40% of what I do at work is statistical analysis and another 20% is serving on technical review boards. This is how I know that a lot of this ya'll are suggesting is now how things are done when you're trying to objective assess something.

In this lies the issue most are having because even Though you may feel your opinion is objective it is still your opinion and view on objectivity that is based on your worldview and understandings. The average takes into account that opinion components and makes its impact nominal as it objectively looks past ones worldview to find a center road that each facet related to a perception is connected to...

I've always admitted there is a small level of judgement call here that is going to require some subjectivity. My point has been that you can't eliminate that through an average or a panel of people. It's always going to be there. And again, my purpose was never to judge anything, only to moderate. However, if no one is going to vote, then I had to make a judgement, and I just myself better to be objective than people who come in here saying that a rapper is their favorite rapper.

law of av·er·ag·es

noun

noun: law of averages

the principle that supposes most future events are likely to balance any past deviation from a presumed average.

lol My nigga did you just try to make your case with the dictionary definition of a flawed pseudo mathematical principle?

I tried to be nice and keep my response to you simple, but if you want to be real about it. Nobody who knows what they are talking about uses the Law of Averages in real discussion because it's not even a real law. It's an oversimplification of the Law of Large Numbers.

The above are examples of the law of averages. The law of averages is a false belief, sometimes known as the 'gambler's fallacy,' that is derived from the law of large numbers. We'll get to that in a second! The law of averagesis a spurious generalization that makes the assumption that if any deviations in expected probability occur with a small number of consecutive experiments, that they will certainly have to 'average out' sooner rather than later.

The law of averages is based on the law of large numbers, which is an actual law! The law of large numbers is a proven law that states that any deviations in expected probability will 'average' or 'even' out after numerous (and we're talking hundreds or thousands) experimental trials.
http://study.com/academy/lesson/law-of-averages-definition-formula.html

It is only valid for a select group of circumstances, and these topics are not among those.

 

[The Lonious Monk]

A couple of my meetings got cancelled, so today is going to be a slow day at work for me. In light of that and the fact that the niggas that thought they could do it better didn't pick it up, I'll continue. The next rapper is Nas.

To finalize here, I'm upping Pac's Subject Matter to a 5 because of arguments made, so his final score is 37.5. I'm not changing the Storytelling score. Those arguing for that supported their arguments with songs that largely weren't stories. The legitimate stories they provided demonstrated that he was a very good storyteller, but he didn't tell many full blown stories especially when you consider how much material he has in general. Further, his stories lack the detail, diversity, and creativity seen in the stories from the elite storytellers.

 

[Weazel]

Monk never listened to a lot of Pac's music that's for sure

 

[The Lonious Monk]

Monk never listened to a lot of Pac's music that's for sure

lol I have a lot of Pac's music. Why do you think I haven't listened to it just because I don't agree with you?

 

[Weazel]

Monk never listened to a lot of Pac's music that's for sure

lol I have a lot of Pac's music. Why do you think I haven't listened to it just because I don't agree with you?

Reading between the lines ain't that hard

This thread made it clear to me that you barely know Pac's body of work

And yeah, you can buy shit

But to know it, you should listen to it.