tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.comments2023-10-29T03:21:50.171-04:00SCHWAPP!!!Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05734361945694475981noreply@blogger.comBlogger2811125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-48736372339144273902014-03-06T18:05:29.900-05:002014-03-06T18:05:29.900-05:00Dan Slott the sock puppet that makes lies and then...Dan Slott the sock puppet that makes lies and then tries to spin things his way. History is showing Dan's true colors.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-75544602297410995652013-06-27T06:07:59.873-04:002013-06-27T06:07:59.873-04:00on the flash: cannibalism
on the brainiac 5:rape ...on the flash: cannibalism<br />on the brainiac 5:rape <br /><br />note:i don't see that flash cover as rape because the knife implies "im going to eat you."mirko lo ofnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-10826918208977809602013-03-26T15:57:48.467-04:002013-03-26T15:57:48.467-04:00Thank you kindly, anonymous poster! :)Thank you kindly, anonymous poster! :)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05734361945694475981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-64373842343627702442013-03-26T15:31:07.259-04:002013-03-26T15:31:07.259-04:00haha. This was awesome. Dude, you really missed ov...haha. This was awesome. Dude, you really missed over at BC, not that I care. Its turning into a Marvel love fest. Everyone in this industry loves them now. From Beat blogs who don't take a negative criticism to IDW with John Barber writing all the monthly solicits in the predictable Marvel way, to the cadre of Marvel refugees at Valiant, to the new talent jumping from Image and other indies soiling themselves in the process. Or I believe "selling out" is the term.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-19406065232182872712013-02-16T00:19:30.327-05:002013-02-16T00:19:30.327-05:00You are an evil man, khuxie!
dieterYou are an evil man, khuxie!<br /><br />dieterdie-ynghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00330556892566043898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-6447300771781719222012-08-22T20:54:02.932-04:002012-08-22T20:54:02.932-04:00Lou: oh, and I obviously miss you, too, sir. ;)Lou: oh, and I obviously miss you, too, sir. ;)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05734361945694475981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-5293826922925490082012-08-22T20:53:13.899-04:002012-08-22T20:53:13.899-04:00Evilwilma: You're a funny dude. ;)
Chris (who...Evilwilma: You're a funny dude. ;)<br /><br />Chris (who had their comment disappear for reasons I do not know): Miss you and the gang, but think the way you plan on dealing with it is sound. Please feel free to repost something (especially plugging the site you'll be publishing your writing on). <br /><br />Lou: Oh, Lou...might heart goes out to you on the developments with the owner of your LCS (for the loss of life, more than the inconvenience for shopping, obviously). <br /><br />While BC could do a better job sometimes of indicating who actually contributed an article, I don't think I've ever mistaken who wrote it. When I wanted to give him a hard time about the number of Top Ten lists published on the site and he objected to my attributing such a high level of control over the site, it opened up this debate. <br /><br />When he made the misunderstanding my fault, when so many of these other contributors are literally published under his login, he made Brendon's hiring seem like his decision in the past (rather than suggestion), the site still called him the EiC in places and the most noticeable regular comics-side contributor with any other credits (Kotler) expresses a deference to Rich that suggests she'd risk a bladder rupture rather than urinate without his permission...well...it set me on a mission. Which ended with his suggestion that he fixed it on the site now. If he hasn't done a good enough job in remedying that, someone else can hold his feet to the fire. I kept checking one or two threads where the leaving thing had played out and finally felt comfortable the last of the two was dead 2-3 days ago, so I'm not looking to give BC any further traffic. <br /><br />More individual accounts or posting everything from a Staff account (unless done by someone who rates their own account) would prevent any inaccurately attributed influence (or greatly reduce it). Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05734361945694475981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-67731773728793218902012-08-22T18:06:40.161-04:002012-08-22T18:06:40.161-04:00Khux, this is Lou from the BC forums--miss you, gu...Khux, this is Lou from the BC forums--miss you, guy.<br /><br />Been following this back and forth, head spinning these days (my LCS store owner and friend of nearly 20 years died on Saturday, leaving the future of a comics store in a big part of northeast CT in doubt--have no easy substitute without having to travel great distances), so forgive me if I'm simplifying some things.<br /><br />It would seem to me that part of the problem seems to be that the tagline on most comics stories on BC state "Written by Rich Johnson" when that isn't necessarily true. Rich may not have written it, and may not have even posted it online--it's like my stepping away from my desk at work without securing my computer, and someone coming up and sending emails out in my name that I haven't written and may not even agree with. In some cases it states in the beginning of a piece that it is written by someone else (such as Manoulis' comics reviews), other times not. <br /><br />It would seem to me that some of this could be alleviated if either the main page showed the actual author below the title link and / or on the actual page. Maybe on the actual page not only showing who the author is, but also who posted it--I'm sure in some cases it's not the same person. That way there could be some accountability that could be backtracked to as need be, instead of trying to guess who may have written what.<br /><br />I guess it comes down to the authors and / or posters each having their own ID that shows, and not sharing that with anyone else, like any other company (I work for a major insurance company in Hartford, so this is where I am coming from).<br /><br />If I'm wrong in any way, let me know. I'll shut up now.<br /><br />LouLou Whttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14612470104172032485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-64794618511059596822012-08-22T00:56:50.916-04:002012-08-22T00:56:50.916-04:00Okay, so I have to come HERE to stalk you and hope...Okay, so I have to come HERE to stalk you and hope for some witty silliness and silly wittiness in response to something inane I've said?<br />*SIGH* I guess so...<br /><br />Oh, sorry, carry on with your fighting. I didn't read the whole thing because I saw a My Little Pony covered in glitter then ate some cheese, and why are you only here again?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-40034303096771647702012-08-20T07:58:48.392-04:002012-08-20T07:58:48.392-04:00Wow, Rich...really? You've not made any indica...Wow, Rich...really? You've not made any indication of these changes until you were called on it here, including your website apparently leaving inaccurate information up for a matter of years, but the objection is to my calling it "out of nowhere"?<br /><br />To each their own, but when you indicate such changes all at once (regardless of when they occurred) without prior communication, I stand by qualifying it as "out of nowhere". <br /><br />If your claims are accurate (it should be noted that Jim Kuhoric didn't return a request for comment submitted through your site's webform), then your site remained inaccurate until the middle of this discussion. <br /><br />You put the onus on me by saying I was demonstrating that I was incapable of accepting that things change, when I was simply accepting what your site still said was the case at the time I claimed it. You were very much claiming I was the one in the wrong (and responsible for that wrong), when I was merely following what your own site said. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05734361945694475981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-57788992619041048332012-08-20T07:10:07.193-04:002012-08-20T07:10:07.193-04:00Out of nowhere? It's been three and a half yea...Out of nowhere? It's been three and a half years. You seem to be mistaking incompetence for maliciousness. The website copy written three years ago no longer reflected the changing nature of the site. And I haven't said you're wrong about going on about anything. I'm certainly not blaming you. You're ascribing motivation to me that I don't have.Rich Johnstonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08094139982498797455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-3451221200499747392012-08-18T14:22:25.373-04:002012-08-18T14:22:25.373-04:00nice article, i neded the reminder. i sould buy mo...nice article, i neded the reminder. i sould buy more of thier comics. but id rather put cash in hand, i hate epaymentsgreymousernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-90981243187961924312012-08-17T10:54:35.458-04:002012-08-17T10:54:35.458-04:00PJP, you know I love and respect you...but, howeve...PJP, you know I love and respect you...but, however disproportionate my pursuit, I'm not negatively impacting others directly and, when Rich expressed his problems with what I wrote, I answered it in a timely and direct manner, rather than ignore it and go to...let's say...The Outhousers to address whatever comment they may have had and ignore his. ;)<br /><br />Like I've said about five times above: this entry was intended to tweak his nose about the hypocrisy of his unnecessary dig at Newsarama whilst deflecting criticism on BC. When, out of nowhere, he claimed to not have the influence over content at BC that he had previously claimed and his site still indicated, and said that I was incapable of accepting that things change, it became about questioning the veracity of his claims, the blame-shifting timing of them and his attempt to suggest I was the one in the wrong for going on what his own website said his powers were. <br /><br />If we have a minor debate where you employ faulty logic, infuriating tactics and try to blame me for believing something you said, you can be sure I'll vent about it somewhere on the 'net and not back down for as long as the behavior continues. <br /><br />People keep conflating my continuing the argument with some level of assigned priority or importance when that's all in their head. C'mon, Peter, I've watched your back and forth with Knut on Alan Moore, but you'll never see me claim that you're being disproportionate in your pursuit. ;)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05734361945694475981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-21870774039430555182012-08-17T06:28:56.968-04:002012-08-17T06:28:56.968-04:00Kev, I reckon you're being every bit as dispro...Kev, I reckon you're being every bit as disproportionate in pursuit of this as I think Rich was in banning Joe in the first place.<br /><br />Plus, I'm not even sure what 'this' you're pursuing. <br /><br />Rich, you've got a shedload of people telling you the Panther headline pissed them off, whatever you firmly believed or believe... Maybe that's worth learning from? PJPhttp://www.bleedingcool.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-57538268700336680892012-08-17T00:07:40.145-04:002012-08-17T00:07:40.145-04:00Thanks, GM. Thanks, GM. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05734361945694475981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-7950681631333701582012-08-16T23:50:45.118-04:002012-08-16T23:50:45.118-04:00my respects, Kev.my respects, Kev.greymousernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-48242706987446203972012-08-16T22:22:33.268-04:002012-08-16T22:22:33.268-04:00Well meant, but not bloody likely, TripMs. ;)Well meant, but not bloody likely, TripMs. ;)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05734361945694475981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-72508235386312308952012-08-16T22:11:51.627-04:002012-08-16T22:11:51.627-04:00========================
BTW, I appreciate the inv...========================<br />BTW, I appreciate the invite. I don't even doubt the sincerity of it, despite the fact that you know it would most likely require that I be independently wealthy in order to afford the time and expense of a trip to the UK specifically to watch you work. The expense being the divorce proceedings when my wife leaves me for wasting our vacation on watching someone cover the comic book industry. <br />===============================<br />Woah.<br /><br />Kevin, might I suggest that you guys hug it out?<br /><br />Email?mad_man_moonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03676685720381080015noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-3935713342787237692012-08-16T21:49:51.183-04:002012-08-16T21:49:51.183-04:00BTW, I appreciate the invite. I don't even dou...BTW, I appreciate the invite. I don't even doubt the sincerity of it, despite the fact that you know it would most likely require that I be independently wealthy in order to afford the time and expense of a trip to the UK specifically to watch you work. The expense being the divorce proceedings when my wife leaves me for wasting our vacation on watching someone cover the comic book industry. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05734361945694475981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-42632237220453182802012-08-16T21:47:15.493-04:002012-08-16T21:47:15.493-04:00Brendon gave YOUR acceptance speech for the award....Brendon gave YOUR acceptance speech for the award. Pardon the technically-off, accurate-in-spirit phrasing. <br /><br />You keep making this statement that THOSE WHO READ IT ALREADY didn't consider it a spoiler without any obvious sense of irony. Or acknowledgement that it's just not accurate: only one person uttered the phrase, and their reason for not considering it a spoiler was they had known since the marriage that it would be ended. Others who read it said that, while it may not have been a HUGE spoiler, it was, indeed, a spoiler. That was your "hostile crowd" that supposedly had a worthwhile number of people agreeing with your stated position. Arguing that there were bigger spoilers is only an effective defense in your mind, sir.<br /><br />For the record, I don't attribute any malice or ill intent to your mistakes, just to the tactics used to try to avoid owning them. As you might notice from my discussion of Kotler and the man running Image, accountability and a lack of overt hypocrisy are rather important items to me. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05734361945694475981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-49233921077602024192012-08-16T21:28:30.039-04:002012-08-16T21:28:30.039-04:00By the way, you have an open invite to come round ...By the way, you have an open invite to come round and watch me Rich Johnstonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08094139982498797455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-81477819483799430012012-08-16T21:26:52.876-04:002012-08-16T21:26:52.876-04:00Nothing supposed about it, I am not lying to you b...Nothing supposed about it, I am not lying to you but the not way I think you'd believe it is if you'd come round to my house and watch me work and even then you'd dismiss it as an elaborate trick. Brendon accepted the award. And if I'd talked about Cyclops, Spidey or the Rasputin twins, that would have been a spoiler for the comic, this was not. People who'd read the comic realised that, the reaction was from people who hadn't read the comic and feared it was a spoiler. But it wasn't, and I take full responsibility for that article.Rich Johnstonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08094139982498797455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-18614426866170700432012-08-16T20:13:36.403-04:002012-08-16T20:13:36.403-04:00MMM: I genuinely appreciate and admire the level o...MMM: I genuinely appreciate and admire the level of sharing you used to illustrate your point. I don't have much to say in response, as I wouldn't endeavor to change your view and you've made it known that you'd prefer not to continue here.<br /><br />But I have to say: demand is *not* a subtle word. ;) <br /><br />Dieter: the thing is that I don't actually care about top ten lists. As I said originally, I didn't intend to bring the whole drawn out topic of why I left the site here.<br /><br />Instead, I brought the lighter topic of his mocking Newsarama in defense of his own work when it wasn't entirely accurate. I've mocked Newsarama over their practice before, but it's all about the frequency and trick of drawing it out over several clicks and...see...I'm getting sidetracked again. ;) <br /><br />So I went with the light-hearted point (albeit with the heavy-handed image) and stumbled into Rich suddenly claiming to have no control of the site outside of his own writing, despite claiming an award for the ENTIRE site as being his own that others merely supported him in getting, an About page all about him and a Contributor page that called him the founder and EiC. Somehow, I'm just unable to understand change, despite the fact that this change has allegedly been in place for quite some time and he only mentions it when it is a convenient way to dodge even the slightest responsibility for a trivial item. <br /><br />Rich: BTW, I poured over the thread at BenBo again and a total of one person uttered a phrase that it wasn't a spoiler, but the completion of it was: "as soon as that pair was announced I was waiting for the breakup." So they say it isn't a spoiler because they knew it was going to happen. Not quite what you're trying to suggest, especially since you thought it was newsworthy. You felt it was shocking that they'd undo it without fanfare after having hyped the marriage to no end. It was news to you because there was a surprising element of some sort to it, yet you argue at the same time that you spoiled nothing. <br /><br />It's asinine, as was thanking publicly the folks that supposedly apologized to you through PM, which derailed that thread into questioning whether any such poster existed. At least we know where Kotler got her idea to blog that someone at BC asked her to plead Joe's case to you.<br /><br />I didn't intend to respond, but that was for Dieter. I couldn't let him down and pass a chance to say something *not* about a Top Ten. ;)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05734361945694475981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-37351013197759271132012-08-16T19:31:42.358-04:002012-08-16T19:31:42.358-04:00Cheerio Kevin,
Just read your article and the who...Cheerio Kevin,<br /><br />Just read your article and the whole back and forth between you and Rich.<br /><br />I do think that while your argument is valid, that you do get a little over the top regarding the whole top ten stuff.<br /><br />Other stuff like Kotler's Firefly fiasco or the way he suddenly shifts around to imply he is not the big head honcho over on BC, or the way he swings his banhammer around suddenly, banning people to his left and his right for no obvious reason (as they have done nothing that they haven't been doing for years), are far more important.<br />Of course that's just how I see it.<br /><br />Another point that's been nagging me is the terrible editing and the appearant inability to use something akin to a spell check. Seriously for a site of this size, that is just lazy and shows a disregard for the people who keep it alive via the forums.<br /><br />dieter aka die-yngdie-ynghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00330556892566043898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14916953.post-534530763645598772012-08-16T18:43:00.973-04:002012-08-16T18:43:00.973-04:00Spam!
Turns out I have an account here.
Either wa...Spam!<br /><br />Turns out I have an account here.<br />Either way, if it ain't from this account, it ain't me!mad_man_moonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03676685720381080015noreply@blogger.com