>Shaggy is a stoner slacker wimp who has a dog.

No, Shaggy is a guy that solves mysteries with his friend Fred, Velma, and Daphne in a van that Fred owns.

Characters aren't just what they physically look like.

>If anything shaggy is his dad as he has the same hair style minus the beard. He’s also a good cook and smokes weed. There’s also a flashback were he meets norvilles grandmother and there’s a shot that look’s literally ripped out of the old scooby doo shows.

Yeah, that's also known as a "reference".

Also, why do we keep going back to this stoner thing? You realise that this is based on a children's cartoon right? Shaggy never actually smoked weed. It's not a character trait.

>Maybe if you watched the show you wouldn’t be the ass in this situation.

The fact that this characters personality is purposefully the opposite of what people associate with Shaggy (e.g., the stoner subculture) as a joke actually makes the opposite point of what you're trying to make.

> Percentages are not a good way of measuring a lot of things.

True.

>This is one of them.

Not true, and you've failed to show that.

You could've made this argument on a quality front, like maybe the 2.66% that's missing on Netflix Canada but is available on Netflix US is the content that everyone watches, but you failed to do so (likely because I suspect that you'd be wrong to make this argument).

Just going "Total too big so no percentage please" means nothing.

>What determines significant in this context is how much less stuff you've got to watch. I think having 200 fewer shows and movies is a significant difference.

Why 200? Why not 250? Why not 5000? Why not 10? I want my 10 movies. If I don't have those 10 movies Americans have I'll scream. Give them to me.

I came into your comment somewhat willing to see you make this point, you have like 30 links, and not a single one of them actually shows that the definition of "Canadian content" could impact the size of Netflix Canada's library versus the US.

You finally have one post that at least makes this argument... But with no evidence whatsoever. "Cautionary tale" how? Where's the proof? How do I know the fact I can't watch Paranormal Activity on Netflix while an American can is a result of content rules versus some streaming rights issue?

>the point is that you can't use a percentage to measure this.

Why not? Seems somewhat arbitrary to say this. It sounds more like cope than anything honestly. "Oh the content library is so large that you should ignore the percentage because then it doesn't make the point I might want it to."