Falls under "possible but not probable".  As Dave notes the market moves on the pros opinions generally not users.  That said I have no doubt that some of the TNs on CellarTracker are some form of potential "manipulation" whether that be from the retail side or from individual users.

I glance at Cellartracker TNs to try to figure out when to open some wines I own and to help make some purchase decisions on aged wines. However, if I see that I am going to be influenced significantly by a user's notes, I search out what else that user has written. For example, on that eBob thread, it was apparent that the TN writer, whose motives were questioned by the winery, didn't like any California wines.

Fair enough. I generally treat CT notes as "nice to know" unless I know the poster. I'm always looking for a way to beat the system in my line of work, so I guess it just transfers over ;-)

It is an interesting contrast. I always look at the critics' scores as a wine's potential, and the cellartracker scores as to how it is drinking right now. They don't show oxidized bottles or otherwise flawed ones, though, so for older wines I take their scores (and those of the critics) as being for the wines that are in decent condition. I have yet to find a way to measure how many times someone has opened say, a 66 Cos or whatever, and found it madierized or corked or way to old, versus how may really merit a score of 90 or whatever critics are giving it.

i find the greatest value of cellar tracker reviews, to me, is that of getting an indication of how the wine is drinking (closed down, fallen off, drinking well, etc.). while i respect the opinions on there it is difficult to look at "userabc" and give any real weight to his 94 point score on a wine. cellar tracker is a fantastic tool but i just don't see it impacting the market because their is no singular voice (Parker, Tanzer) lending consistency and accountability to the average scores.