It’s not that the lists published by several magazines aren’t accurate, says Bery Sperling, who devised the methodology and collected and analyzed the data for all 17 years of Money’s “Best Places to Live” features. But the criteria on which evaluations are based isn’t as consistent as it could be.

A great example is Bremerton. It was at the top of Money’s heap several years ago, and since all but disappeared from the list.

The reports “would have more value without the changes,” the quality of life analyst told more than 100 reporters who cover residential and commercial real estate on a regular basis. “But their main purpose isn’t to provide value, it’s to sell magazines.”

Besides Money, Sperling has done studies for Self (“Best Cities for Woman”), Newsweek (“Great College Towns”), Seventeen (“This Town Rocks! Best Cities for Teens”) and SmartMoney (“Best Places to Buy a Second Home”). He has also done a number of similar studies for corporate advertising campaigns for such firms as Korbel Champagne (“Most Romantic Cities”) and Chevrolet (“Safest Cities”).

In almost all of his annual reports, some places fall off the list. But that “doesn’t mean here today, gone tomorrow,” he insisted. It’s because to keep the studies fresh, sponsors often change their criteria or the weighting to give different import to various categories.

“One year, education is important. Another year, it’s crime rates or a low unemployment rate. It depends on what is on their reader’s minds. But just because a location drops off the list doesn’t mean it’s no longer desirable.”

Sperling, who keeps track of 3,000 cities and is in the process of developing his own sprawl index, said publishers like to run the lists more for the publicity they generate for their magazines than as a public service to their readers. “They’re popular because the press mentions the magazine’s name in their stories” about the lists, he said.