CAN YOU BE AN AMBASSADOR FOR 2000AD?

[Dog Deever]

In fact, as a fan of 2000ad your primary goal should be to do whatever you can to be supportive - even if that only means simply buying the comic each week and not denigrating it.

Sorry Kev, I can't agree with this. It's not your (or anyone's) place to tell anyone else what their goals as fans should be.

If a tradesman comes to your house to do some work and bodges it, do you say "That's great" or say nothing and continue to use that tradesman?
I doubt it- anyone with half a brain would tell the tradesman, manager or whoever was in charge that they were dissatisfied with the work.

Brainlessly accepting whatever you get, like Tharg's walking dead, is the road to ruin for the comic.

Sure, there is no need to be rude about creators (and that cannot and should not be tolerated), but everyone has the right to comment on a product they buy- positive or negative. Remember that creators wages are not magically created by Tharg's money fairies. WE pay the creators through buying the comic, we are entitled to comment even if we don't like something. This should be balanced by commenting on how good things are when we like them.

I cannot and will not subscribe to any kind of censorship, no matter how softly, softly it is worded. That doesn't mean I'm any less of a fan than you or CF or anyone else. Simply wearing 2k T-shirts and buying the prog and the meg is being supportive.

If you want 2000ad to remain the galaxies greatest, then blindly accepting anything that comes your way is not the way to go about it. That way lies Fleisher, who might still be there if it were not for the almost universal dislike of his 2k work being expressed. The downside is that some folk will overstep the mark. Weed them out and ban them- that's democracy and free speech in action and this is supposed to be a democracy we live in, not Mega-City One. This is not 1984 and Rebellion is not Big Brother (in the Orwell sense), and should never become so. When this board becomes 'positive comments only' then it will just be a weak, shallow, arse-licking corporate promotion tool, rather than a forum for fans to talk openly about the comic, I won't even bother to lurk any more.

If the powers that be are truly interested in what the fans think, then there should be a mechanism for feedback. In modern times, internet forums are the the tool of choice. That feedback is pointless if it is censored, or 'positive only'. How can anyone tell if something has been favourably or unfavourably received if all that is ever said is
"Duuuhr, Dat is da gratest fing evah."

[John Caliber]

There's nothing wrong with rallying the troops. I only buy 2000AD for Judge Dredd (but I'll freely admit I don't get half as much pleasure from the modern stories as those from 20-30 years ago, with a few exceptions), and I enjoy the Strontium Dog revival, but I also am aware that if I and other readers do not support 2000AD, then there will be no more Dredd or Johnny Alpha, meaning British comics will have lost two more of its institutions (or have their comic incarnations entirely replaced by computer games and movies, which is a possibility).

It's reader support through thick and thin that has kept the Megazine from folding years ago. Certainly, there have been times when I stopped reading both titles because the Thrill-Power supply had been choked off and editors completely lost focus on what made the comic unique, but when fresh creative talent emerges, it has to be nurtured (how many of today's writers/artists would never have emerged if not for the avenue of employment offered by Tharg and the loyalty of thousands of readers?).

If we all buggered off because we didn't like one or two stories, doubtlessly, we'd have nothing left to buy but Marvel and DC, and we'd now all be on those message boards, knee-deep in flame wars over the correct way to draw Mister Fantastic's hair  

[TordelBack]

The packet of pharmaceutical grade caffiene (of which just one spoonful had me vomiting and retching on the floor of my living room for 12 hours before sending me into A&E) was given to me by a flying green man in a jumpsuit.

You don't get that with an equivalent amount of Plutonium.

[Dog Deever]

That's what I mean John- if you're not liking something in the prog/ Meg, and you are proscribed from saying anything negative, then you are left with two choices...

1) put up with it in the vain hope that change will happen, which it won't as the only feedback will be 'everything is Arsom', even when it isn't. IMO- A stupid position to advocate.

2) stop buying until it does change. In the end that's the ultimate show of silent disapproval that any consumer has. I would hope that nobody would advocate this course- cos it would destroy everything (it nearly did before).

I personally find the 'no negativity' trope to be an extremist and knee-jerk, reactionary position which is just the flip-side of allowing people to be rude and abusive about creators and their work. They are opposite pole positions. The sensible approach is the middle and (therefore moderate) position, of allowing criticism without standing for nastiness. Surely that is a common sense approach.



To imply that anyone who raises any dissatisfaction with the product they buy isn't a proper fan is, frankly, bollocks. No offence intended Kev.

[TordelBack]

I want to live in Deeverland.  It seems like a sensible place. Does 2000AD have an embassy there?

[Richmond Clements]

I personally find the 'no negativity' trope to be an extremist and knee-jerk, reactionary position which is just the flip-side of allowing people to be rude and abusive about creators and their work. They are opposite pole positions. The sensible approach is the middle and (therefore moderate) position, of allowing criticism without standing for nastiness. Surely that is a common sense approach

Absolutely. Which is all anyone is saying- to post 'X is shit' is unacceptable and insulting, just be constructive!

[John Caliber]

You can't beat a nice, colourful graph! 

[Dunk!]

A big colourful graph always sways me.

[uncle fester]

I think perhaps that the last few days have shown that, once you factor in the innate human ability to start a row on an internet forum, the middle marker on the scale that Dog Deever provided proves not to be too far removed from wishful thinking.

I took Kev's initial post to be a useful thought on how to attract new readers to the Prog and Meg, and to add to the list of things to be proud of - many of which are listed on this thread already. Surely that's a more constructive outlook to take?

EDIT: dammit I was typing on a phone and Richmond beat me to it. Bloody succint writers...

[John Caliber]

I was reminded of Dave Cameron's Big Society rhetoric when I read Kev's starting post. Good, positive, optimistic. Unlike Cameron's 'create by destroying' antics, Kev is entirely honourable.

[Dog Deever]

Absolutely. Which is all anyone is saying- to post 'X is shit' is unacceptable and insulting, just be constructive!

Ah now Rich, that isn't really what Kev said (though it might be what he meant):

Can you be a reasoned, level headed and articulate individual who simply advocates the good things about the galaxy's greatest comic, The Meg and it's associated merchandise?

even if that only means simply buying the comic each week and not denigrating it.

All sailing a little too close to the censorship camp for my liking. Of course, Kev is entitled to believe and say that if he wants, but there'll be no agreement on that position from me. Call me Marxist scum, but I'm on the side of the poor downtrodden consumer.

I work in education where the whole 'no negativity' thing is becoming a major part of practice, and look at the fucking state of the education system. If you can't tell someone that there is something wrong with what they are doing, then they will spend their time thinking that what they are doing is good when it isn't.
It's all in the interpretation of the wording, like. I'd never be in favour of slating creators willy nilly, after all- I am one, even if an amateur / not a very good one!

I want to live in Deeverland.  It seems like a sensible place. Does 2000AD have an embassy there?

it's a nice place to visit, but you wouldn't want to live there.
Whilst there is no 2000ad embassy here, there are boxes and boxes of 2000ad's, Megazines and GNs.

[John Caliber]

Optimism is one thing, but to be blindly optimistic is symptomatic of a maniac. Those who claim to live by it are self-deluded, amped up on extraordinarily high levels of naturally occuring 'feel good' brain chemicals (just like like William Shatner, and my former psychologist).

I envy them! 

[SmallBlueThing]

Now i know mr kevlev is a thoroughly decent guy, and i shant have a word said against him, but im a leeeetle uncomfortable with my reading of the initial message. See, 2000AD doesnt need ambassadors, doesnt need a moritorium on 'negativity' or a 'positivity drive'. In fact, i am firmly of the opinion that anyone who uses 'negativity' in a pejoritive sense should receive a jolly good smacked bottom and be blasted into Spain. Negativity, or 'criticism' as its more properly called, should be encouraged, even if it breaks some creators' heartses. Most of 'em are tuftie types and can handle it, and if you're the type who cant stand your work being criticised, perhaps it would be better to develop a thicker skin.

That said, there's no excuse for blatant rudeness. But saying 'i think x's art/scripts are shit' isnt rude. It's not a personal assault, its a crude statement of personal opinion, as is everything written here. I also very much disagree that criticism should always be 'constructive'. I dont always feel like being constructive when slagging something- why should i? And more to the point, what about those who CANT criticise constructively? Those who just dont know enough about the form, or dont have the language skills, or are too intimidated by some of the regulars here? Those that just want to come here and talk about a comic they like, but want to say there's something about it they hate?

Thankfully, there's not much to dislike about 2000AD, if you're a longtime fan. Those of us who have been with it since the very first issue, week in week out over the last near-34 years know that if there's something crap this week it doesnt matter- within a month or so itll be gone. I have no reason to moan about The Red Seas being in my prog, for example. I may not like it, and skip it entirely much of the time- but im buggered if im going to pretend i love it just to big-up the prog, or to avoid creator-angst.

In short, no, i dont see the need to alter my approach to being a fan.
SBT

[Richmond Clements]

But saying 'i think x's art/scripts are shit' isnt rude. It's not a personal assault, its a crude statement of personal opinion

But it is rude. It is a personal assault. To have what may amount to six months or more work dismissed in one word as 'shit' can be nothing other than rude and insulting.

[TordelBack]

But it is rude. It is a personal assault. To have what may amount to six months or more work dismissed in one word as 'shit' can be nothing other than rude and insulting.

And on the website of that creator's employer too.  I presume I'm misreading SBT's intent here.  

I don't see any contradiction between being a fan and offering a negative opinion of something you don't like, but being rude and dismissive, that's just bad manners.  You've become the shouty guy in the restaurant that's trying to make the waiter look small. There's a world of difference between not blindly accepting something you don't like, and announcing "I pay your wages".