2000 AD Online Forum

Refering to the recent prog review thread, this has just appeared from Matt:

"OK, that's enough. You don't like a story, fine, but comments such as Philt's are utterly disrespectful to the professional creators involved. If you can't be constructive, or at least polite, in your criticisms, then go off to some other corner of the internet and be needlessly rude and confrontational. But it will no longer be tolerated on this site.

I've had more than one creator contacting me recently about comments made on this messageboard, and frankly this forum has been on thin ice for a while. It isn't doing the site, 2000 AD or Rebellion any favours, and unless I start seeing some moderation in language used then the messageboard will be pulled altogether.

A little decorum, please, and a little more thought before posting ill-considered and disrespectful remarks."

I like this Forum. The thought that it has been on 'thin ice for a while' makes me saddened. I think from now on we all ought to just be aware of our attitudes whilst on here. I'm probably as guilty as the rest in some respects but I think we are all old enough and wise enough to moderate ourselves, I don't want the forum to be pulled I've been a 2000ad fan since I was seven, this board is a great way for us all to communicate and exchange ideas.

On the other foot I think that there is a certain aspect to how far can we go, there are guidelines and making defamatory comments against people and personal attacks is one of the no-no's - the board is a critique and does review the latest publications. Matt's been approached by some creators recently and I know from some of the threads they in turn have retaliated to remarks made against them, we are entitled to an opinion I think we have to be careful on how we phrase it.

Discuss?

I already did. Here it is again, for the cheap seats.

Totally agree. It's not the first time I've read some ill-conceived, vindictive remarks regarding one creator or another, it's not even constuctive criticism half the time and appears to just be an excuse to vent some deep seated inferiority complex-it's no wonder comic readers get a hard time of it.

I killfiled Philt yonks ago (can't remember why) so I've got no idea what he said, but we've been here before, haven't we, even in the three or four years I've been using the board.

I just think it's a shame that a minority will always spoil it for the rest. A messageboard without critiscm or comment would render it pretty much redundant; having said that, this being the internet, an awful lotta folks will forget that the creators could potentially read anything they post, and whatever the merits of the work in question, at the end of the day it's something they've worked hard on and deserves, at the very least, a considered response; i.e. explain why you think something's shit; don't just post 'it's shit.'

And when it all decends into personal attacks on certain creators (see every thread ever started regarding Pat Mills), I think that's when a line needs to be drawn. That doesn't really benefit anyone.

Matt's just passing the pain downwards. I don't see anything remotely as bad on here as you get on other review forums.

I would say in many cases it's the creators themselves who have acted like prima donnas, with John Smith being the latest example. Matt Smith has to soothe over the fragile, shattered egos. Well he'd do well with concentrating on helping his staff reach the creative highs they are capable of, rather than actually pay credence to them sulking at online comments.

Phil T's remarks were hardly the zenith of creative criticism and its clearly not the worst in 10 years for many people. In the past year or so the Prog has been excellent, but this last month has seen a slightly lower level of zarjazness than what has been achieved recently. But even so - he should be allowed to express an opinion however over the top.

As for the board being 'on thin ice' - I've never heard such nonsense. Take a look around at some of the other anarchic forums around and be pleased at the quality of some of members on here.

It's just another form of cyber-bulling, innit? It's happened here before and I'm sure it'll happen again.

That said, I am of the view that you can say anything is shit if you want- but you better be able to explain exactly why it is shit. Just brushing it off as shit with one or two words is lazy.

whodidwhatonthewherenow?

 I am probably not the best behaved boarder here but  i generally avoid personal attacks on others and generally avoid posting abuse and insults.I am guilty of a certain amount of swearing but in my opinion its not excessive.

 As for the reviews if i was a creator then i would want to know why my work is rubbish.That was S*** ,that was crap or whatever does not constitute a review anyway.

 Creators want feedback that is constructive.Constructive does not have to mean positive either.I am a creator of sorts as i am doing illustration and drawing landscapes and i show others the work and i want feedback not just "Its nice" or "i dont like it ".I dont care if its positive or negative as long as its constructive.


 Comments like "Fanboy town" or "messageboard town" in reference to this board [or any other board or forum] are not welcome either as that is insulting as well.Fans buy and read the product and support the industry so its derogatory to make comments like that as if there were no fans or boarders there would not be an industry.

Respect all round please.

I would say in many cases it's the creators themselves who have acted like prima donnas, with John Smith being the latest example.

:-) Yeah, I wasn't going to mention that, but...

I'm still bemused by the whole episode. Almost makes a mockery of what I've just said. I was actually trying to follow my own guidelines there; cite precedent, point out that I wasn't having a go, refrain from a personal attack on John himself, and what did I get? A rambling tirade of agressive abuse for my troubles.

Fans - especially internet-based fans - and especially comic fans - are always going to gripe, bitch and moan. That's just fandom. Sure, it's negative, unhelpful and perhaps even insulting, but are our sad grumblings really going to make a difference to anything?

If anything is going to give Rebellion a bad name, surely it's when creators descend to the same level?

The thing people forget is that the message board is part of an official, commercial website. Because 2000 AD's website is more fan-oriented than most, some posters don't realise that posts here can impact on the company (Rebellion) and magazine itself. And yet I still recall the flack I got when reworking this section by putting the 'fan zone' graphic at the top of the, erm, fan zone. Too many hair-triggers, methinks...

Regarding Matt's general comment, I agree. Criticism is fine, as long as it's constructive. Saying "2000 AD is bollocks!" doesn't help anyone, bar possibly offering some strange relief for the person posting the message. If you don't like a story or some art, say why. Give reasoning. (To be frank, the same should be true for positives - saying _why_ you like something, rather than that you just do, is more helpful to the team and creators.)

I think more people should be honest with themselves about what they post, how they post, and why. If you're talking about someone's work, be constructive, and only say what you would to them in person. Don't be rude, don't be vindictive, and certainly don't be utterly disrespectful.

"whodidwhatonthewherenow?"

Here you go Tweak

Link: Zarjaz Thread

"As for the board being 'on thin ice' - I've never heard such nonsense."

It's a serious point, however. This board's been under threat of being pulled (for various reasons) more than once over the past few years.

I haven't noticed that much out of order, but I speed read most of it and the abuse isn't aimed at me so means very little to me.  

Regarding John Smith, I've never thought of him as taking himself too seriously or being 'prima-donna' about his work.  He is one of the creators who gives feedback on work and offers advice over at scriptdroids and that isn't an ego thing that's for sure.

I think you can give honest critique and if you don't like something you should be able to say so...but justify it and don't be a prick about it.

I have some opinions, but I'm not sure which camp people will assume I'm speaking for : I've been on this forum since the beginning, and on the alt.comics.2000AD NG for some time before that. I consider myself a 2000AD fan, who happens, occasionally, to draw for 2000AD (others may view me as a 'pro' though - in either case, I speak only for myself)

I, personally, would change the rules of this place to match what used to be the rules on 'The Engine' and is the current ruling on panel and pixel, to wit (quote from panelandpixel):

"1.) All user are required to use their REAL NAMES. No interwub handles are supported or tolerated here. You want to post, put your name to your words.

2.) P&P is intended to be an open venue for discourse. (can't very well improve the state of comics if we can't speak frankly about it, can we?) HOWEVER said open discourse does not = free reign to be an unmitigated asshole, or treat other members like shit. You are expect to at the very least pretend to act your age, and with a modicum of civility."

Two simple rules: real names, no being a dick. This is a great forum and has, imho, helped in some small way to contribute to the creation of a great little UK comics industry, and, within the forum there's the opportunity to actually talk to the guys behind 2000AD - those of them that haven't abandoned the place due to the minority of idiots.

Would it harm the place if people weren't allowed to just say 'x is shite'?

- pj

This is the only message board I use because I love 2000AD and the people here aren't mentalists, like every other comics board!

I don't agree with his comments on the prog, or much of anything, but unless he nicked it from Smiths (which he didn't!!!!!) Philt payed £1.90 for that comic he slagged off.

If the board closes will someone come and get me and show me where the new one is please?!

Two very good ideas there, PJ.
I'd certainly back them if they were adopted.

There's some sense in what PJ says. I've always instinctively shied away from webhandles as I didn't think the anonimity would do me any good. The temptaion to be an anonymous jerk would be too great. Using my real name means I feel accountable for my actions.

And yes, I did go through a phase of changing my name every five minutes but only after I'd been here long enough for people to know me, to know that whateverXwhoever was always going to be, I kept the same icon, and I didn't pretend to be anyone else. So ner.

Amen to that.

"I don't agree with his comments on the prog, or much of anything, but unless he nicked it from Smiths (which he didn't!!!!!) Philt payed £1.90 for that comic he slagged off. "

Nobodies suggesting he should't be allowed to say what he likes about it (whether he nicked it or bought it) the question is should he be allowed to use this forum to do it?

-pj

There is another problem with the use of profanities: it ensures that this site is blocked by all those cyber-nanny programs.

I occasionally used to direct my own readers here when they showed an interest in 2000 AD, but not any more. Though I'm sure there are some who can access the site, I really don't want their parents and teachers blaming me for directing them to a site laced with all the profanities that we like to pretend the kids don't know.

My readers tend to be aged between 10 and 14, a little too young for 2000 AD right now (there are plenty of profanities - and quite a bit of nudity - in the comic itself), but not too young to read the Dredd case-files or other reprints from the days when 2000 AD could be read by kids.

It might not be a big problem in cosmic terms, but I've loved 2000 AD since I was ten and it saddens me that the comic and this forum are now beyond the reach of current ten-year-olds. They are, after all, the comic-buyers of the future.

-- Mike

I think he should be allowed to say if he didn't like it, but in a resonable way.  

I've never used a webhandle (well, aside from PJ and paulj - which aren't really anonymous) - although part of the reason I was online was to try and build a name for myself so I could try and get work for 2000AD.

Knowing it's my name on the post has always made me sit and mull over a post before hitting send (except when I'm drunk, but I'm a pleasant drunk, so usually I'm just very happy then)

I just want to add that many creators come on here and manage to integrate without blowing a spare part.

This forum got me back interested in 200Ad and has maintained my interest in the mag for about four maybe five years now. It may cause a pain in the backside every now and again, but it helps retain readers - that's in my experience anyway. I don't know if it's the same for anyone else.

I remember how everyone laughed at George Michael pulling his official forum offline when members started talking about his weight.
I imagine they just went elsewhere, having learned their lesson and spoke only of him in the most glowing of terms from thence forth.

Still, Matt has a very good point, as you can belittle work that lets you down through measured critical analysis, but there's no point - beyond vindictiveness - in aiming criticism personally at a creator.  Being as it's on the internet, it's not even bullying, as at least if you bully someone in real life, you have to look them in the eye.
Online critics who are terribly offended by certain writers/artists' shortcomings never seem to show up to conventions to air their grudges.
Can't imagine why.

OK let's set an example.

Name changed.

I'm Spartacus :-)

There's a tendency to forget that the people you're criticizing (or, sometimes, just slagging) are reading the posts you're making, and they will take it personally (whether that's the intent or not). You can laugh at the George Michael incident, but imagine coming in to your living room and finding everyone who's told you they're your friend sitting discussing how you've become an overweight git.

I'm pretty sure it would sting.

(And, there's a tendancy for people - all people, no one is immune - to really hear the negative stuff more than the positive, and, as a creator it can be hard to work up the motivation to work when you find yourself at the business end of a slew of slagging posts - not me though, I eat that stuff up.)


-pj

'Nobodies suggesting he should't be allowed to say what he likes about it (whether he nicked it or bought it) the question is should he be allowed to use this forum to do it?'

Surely there's no point in this message board if he or anyone can't say what they thought of the comic they spent their money on?

It's what he said and how he said it that's the issue. I'm all for a bit of decorum, but maybe there should be an 'edit' function on posts before we talk about shutting the board down!

I try to be constructive in my criticism but I've said things in a bad mood that I've regretted later.

But Jebus H Jovis, has anyone at the Nerve Centre seen the rest of the internet? This place has it's moments but is an oasis of calm and sense most of the time.

You're not Sparticus, you're Mumpum Marshal.
I think there are good suggestions here that wouldn't harm discourse in the slightest if they were made policy for the forum.  I especially like the no-swearing rule, and I'm no prude - I'm pretty potty-mouthed, even on here.
Could we attach a 'no linking to pics of burds or blurkes in the nuddy' rule, too?

erm...

Link: Code of Conduct

"I think he should be allowed to say if he didn't like it, but in a resonable way."

Well, yes, but Matt wasn't arguing otherwise. In other words, "2000 AD 1587 was rubbish!" = not good. "I didn't like 2000 AD 1587 because [insert reasoning here]" = fine. And "Creator A is a twat" = bad. "I didn't like the latest Creator A story beacuse [insert reasoning here]" = good.

It's about being constructive and respectful, not about stopping anyone from complaining if they feel they need to.

Good pair of rules, those.

How would I change my name if I wanted to drop this mask of anonymity?

I've had to writer some bad reviews in my time, and I do not enjoy doing it.
I always feel guilty after, knowing that someone has spend months, or in the case of a game, years working on it.

Link: Like this one...

I was more making a joke that shutting down the messageboard would do more damage than it would limit.

'Surely there's no point in this message board if he or anyone can't say what they thought of the comic they spent their money on? '

I think this board has more going for it than the review thread (which I'm all for, but if people could lay off the negative - or, at least not pepper it with profanity, insult and innuendo - it might be a lot more useful for helping the creators improve the comic)

-pj

Yeah, clearly not working. If something doesn't work, in my experience, you simplify it.

I think its too big and difficult to enforce. Use your real name and don't be a dick, by contrast, or so obvious, enforcement should be easy,


(Also I've never done anything but glance at the rules and click the button...)

-pj

It'd be a real shame if the board went under.

What comes through for me most here is a geuine love for our product. The art comps are really something special (wish I could still find the time to enter regularly), there's always tons of enthusiasm for the conventions and whatnot, threads like the Mega-City One Space-Maths Poulation-counting make me want to cry with geeky joy - we've even got a thread reviewing reader's Nerve Centre letters, fer crying out loud! If that ain't dedication and then some, I don't know what is.

It'd be criminal if all that was sacrficed just because one or two people can't put a little considered thought into prog reviews.

I agree with many here, compared with damn near any other message board out there, this one is pretty much the only one I've come across where the users aren't preoccupied with one-upmanship, "board etiquette" (how I loathe that term) and slagging matches.

For instance, the official Heroes board at NBC.com (yeah, I have loads of time to kill at work). Any time someone posts a new topic there, about anything, they are immediatly set upon by a swarm of board veterans, who tell them that their topic has already been discussed further down the board "fuckin n00b!!!1".

But here, no such nonsense. For the most part, this board runs pretty smoothly, everyone seems to get on well, topics can be discussed without name-calling. There are the occasional incidents like the review thread, but it would be a shame if that brought the whole board down.

And besides, I'd have to go back to doing actual work while in work. Don't make me do that.

Well, I don't think the board needs to die, just needs to take a good long hard look at itself and ask what exactly it wants to be when it grows up? valued member of society, or a little git sitting around making sarcy comments all the time (as ever, Simpson's quote to the rescue: 'Dude, were you being sarcastic?' 'I don't know')

Further: just because there are worse places out there, doesn't mean this this place is perfect - no where is perfect.

To further my simplifcation of the rules - maybe there should be more moderators, people like Mike Carroll (sorry Mike) who are known and liked by many and grown up enough to know how to conduct themselves and how others should too.

-pj
-pj

I volunteer PJ.

(ha, ha)

Though I've a bit of a suspiscion that the board lacks the admin tools that would make that kind of thing practical.

It must have got pretty bad for Matt to stick up his first post in 18 months. You can see the annoyance of producing a weekly anthology 50 weeks out of a year, choosing the best letters and juggling with deadlines and creator egos only to be rewarded with an 'meh'.

That said, I do agree with the attitude that if you cough up your cash you are entitled to your opinion even if it is poorly articulated and unexplained.

Personal jibes and sweeping generalisations should be outlawed, and I thought such a policy was already in place?

Don't kill the board Matt, I love the comic and have done so for 25 years, I write every week and have never called anyone a dick. Don't let the meh-sayers spoil it for the rest.

Oh and Dark 'Dick' Jimbo don't go hoisting me up as the high water mark of geekiness! Those spine fellas are far worse!

I guess the Norts are objecting to the London mayoral result.

Link: If only this had been around when Rogue Trooper wa

'That said, I do agree with the attitude that if you cough up your cash you are entitled to your opinion even if it is poorly articulated and unexplained. '

You know, this seems to need explained often, for some reason.  No-one would dare suggest that anyone here isn't allowed to express their opinion on the comic (or its contents) - whether they've paid or not - the question is, should this be the place for the overly negative harping that tends to erupt more often than not?

(there are, after all, numerous alternative venues out there: 2000ADreview, alt.comics.2000ad, not to mention blogs by the hundreds... or just, as you know, letters sent to the green dude - were he can filter the more offensive ones as he sees fit)

-pj

"I volunteer PJ.

(ha, ha)
."

Oh, I'm too egomaniacal to not let that kind of power go to my head.

-pj

Anybody volunteering for power shouldn't be given it...

Interesting thread- as are the events leading up to it.  I think I called Pat Mills an unkind name once- and instantly regretted it- but by and large, I save my venom for other posters.

As PJ says, there are no perfect forums- but this is place is practically brimming with enthusiasm compared to most comic forums.  I find I can't even use a lot of other forums, as they're so openly hostile.

As with the real world, when certain things are tolerated (such as swearing, for example), it tends to become the norm and perceived to be 'alright'.  If it really isn't alright, then I don't have a problem with anybody saying so- but the point is, they have to say so.  I swear like a trooper and feel a bit bad that Mike Carroll doesn't send people here, in part, because I swear.

But that's OK- I don't have to swear to be heard.  So I guess I won't be swearing anymore.  It's no big deal.  

I don't mind using my real name either.  Of course, there's a difference between using your real name and using a name that sounds like it's real- and some people will always use fake names.

As for creators, I don't like to see senseless bashing and I don't think many of us do- but by the same token, creators could sometimes think before they retaliate to some imagined slight to their egos (no, the irony isn't lost on me- I know my faults), or at least accept that wires do get crossed.

Of course, one of the real reasons I've never tried to get work at the House of Tharg is that I've never fancied one of those scathing reviews myself- but that's neither here nor there.

My name is Matt Timson- and I shall swear no more.

:)

 Thats going to be a real commitment never to swear ever.Quite honestly if i had to sign an agreement that said no swearing i would have to say no because at some point i know i would break that agreement although not deliberatly.

 Thats it really but i could always improvise and use some other words that are not actually swear words like Drokk etc.


 If its a blanket ban on swearing then i would be happy to improvise if it secures the messageboard .

 Can someone clarify this :

 No swearing at all ?


 Or a modicum of swearing providing its not used for insults or attacks or reviews of the prog etc.


 I always thought s words and f words were acceptable if not *overused* but thats just my opinion.

 I am easy either way so just say yes or no.


 

 

 I dont need to change anything else as i have never been anonymous anyway.

"My name is Matt Timson- and I shall swear no more."

LMAO

I've only been visiting this board for about a month as I've only recently got home broadband hooked up. I've been exploring this 'ere t'internet like crazy (awful big innit?!) I've dropped in on many boards related to stuff I like, and my Grud, there's some nasty crazy folk out there!

I keep coming back here because of the very things that are alleged to be missing - the courtesy, respect, reasoned argument etc. I've just reread the Zarjaz thread that kicked this off and it struck me as lots of witty interesting and diverse comments plus one idiot who's since gone away. My own comment about Dead Eyes earlier on in the thread was pretty scathing, and I really hope that didn't cause offense. I'll take the point on board and refelct more before posting in future, but we must retain the right to criticise (or 'offer formative feedback' as my manager insists)

Overall, things seem very positive and friendly on this board. I appreciate that I haven't read all the old threads though, so this may just be a last straw kinda thingy...I've already been warned never to mention a certain name beginning with S and I still don't know why!

Therefore IMHO, if it ain't broke etc..

As far as I see it, swearing per se is not the problem. Like it or not, the audiences for 2000AD are adults and teenagers, not children. This board has a '15' certificate, so if 10 year olds can't get to it because of net nanny, I think that's probably a good thing.

The problem is that boarders sometimes forget that they are posting on a public forum, and people not participating in the thread may be reading it.

I just meant on this forum.  It's not like I can't pick and choose my words.

Therte was a 'shit' in this week's prog but that may have been down to the cat.

"I've already been warned never to mention a certain name beginning with S and I still don't know why!"

 Its a long story and i dont know the half of it but since i was accused of being [-] when i first joined due to my own conduct i was just as bewildered as you are now.It wasnt funny at all either.

 But anyway dont mention it as it may trigger something to happen or start them off again.


 Just do a search for it.

Although this forum allows people to keep their real names hidden if they choose, it doesn't actually allow anonymous posting. If you change your username, all your old posts follow you. However, I'm happy to be proved wrong if someone can show me that the disrespectful comments are significantly more likely to come from users with completely pseudonyms than those using their real name, or variants of it.

I'm sorry.

Hello Everyone,

I suggested over a year or two ago that there should be 'Tharg's Ten Commandments' emblazened on the top of the messageboard, explaining a basic code of conduct.

It's a shame it even needs to be spelt out,But there are definitely a minority of people who actively berate the people producing the Comics they prefess to enjoy.

I'd hoped for a model of behaviour like at a good dinner party, witty, friendly, intelligent, informative and POLITE.

Why ruin the party for everyone?

Blaming Matt, or 'Egotistical' creators isn't the answer.

Rufus

I think the using real names, which has proved effective in both panel and pixel and the engine, is more about making sure if you're prepared to say something you're prepared to say it with your real name rather than either anonymously or under a pseudonym.

I would suggest, that those people posting with their real names are less likely to post comments that could be considered either deliberately offensive, rude, disrespectful or otherwise pejorative.

(That's not to say that if you don't use your real name you're automatically a troll or anything, it's just if you use you're real name you're less likely to be one...)
 



-pj

aaahh - just done the search you recommended peterwolf.
Nuff said

right I've not been here long but i did lurk for a bit. i have been to other forums in my past but there were all ways borders who had a habit of ganging up on the new'be (one thing i can not accuse this place of). yes everyone is friendly and welcoming here. but if you don't like something in the prog you should say it be it the art or the story your own opinion and all that, but personal attacks can not be justified under any circumstances. as for bad language, were mostly adults here but i would not want to offend anyone by using it so, i don't know.

MPMarshall

"LMAO"

Could you not have used B for bottom instead of turning in the air blue with your pottymouth?

Honestly!

Will somebody please think of the children?

Johnny(Stress)McMonagle

(off to read the post that caused this fuss)

FFS that's taking it too far :-)

I hope that second F stands for Flip

As someone who use to post frequently but is more a lurker now, I may be out of the loop but on balance I've always found this an enjoyable messageboard. Despite its faults, I think its a minor miracle that the messageboard is as well-adjusted as it is, without a proper mod-team.

However, I think the best rule for all internet messageboards (and all forms of communication) is to *think* before responding/commenting. Too often people get caught up in the moment and don't reflect on what they're actually saying before clicking 'post'. I know that's got me into trouble before on this board and I'm sure its what gets most people into trouble. If you always sit back and reflect on the implications of your comment, you're far less likely to post something stupid and inflammatory.

I hope that the board wonâ??t be shut down as itâ??s the only one I visit daily. Everybody tends to be nice and the Art comps are a huge amount of fun.

I donâ??t tend to swear in posts as you can never tell how offended somebody can get over a swearword you thinkâ??s O.k.

On the rare occasions I manage to get around to posting a review I tend to just only comment on the stuff I really enjoy. I follow the rule â??if youâ??ve got nothing nice to say, say nothing at allâ??. I suppose that an alright way to go?

I not sure only using real names would help to change anything. Wouldnâ??t trolls just carry on using real sounding fake names?
I like using the fake name Iâ??ve got now. When Iâ??m posting I always try to remember that what I write could hurt or annoy who itâ??s a reply to, or could be reading it. Thatâ??s why I tend not to post stuff about religion or politics.
Though if the board would change it to real names only Iâ??d go along with it.

"Blaming Matt, or 'Egotistical' creators isn't the answer"

Because everyone's doing that, obviously.

So far, I've been responding as a fan, now I'll add something as a creator:

Here's a thing, and it may not occur to anyone (why would it?) but one of the most irritating things, and, I think, for many other creators...

A typical 2000Ad deadline for artwork is about two weeks for five pages. I'm pretty sure everyone involved with the comic is doing the best they can do, often pouring more time than they can really afford into producing the work. A long series will have a certain lead time - possibly a few months. So, the artist, for example, has just invested two or three months in a strip (locking himself away from friends and family, to ensure 2000ADs relentless schedule is hit).

Then, the news hits that Prog XYZ is out, with the artists strip in it.

First thread: 'Oh, that's back? Meh.'

I'm not asking for sympathy (and I don't complain when people go 'oh, that's back? hurrah!') but you've got to appreciate that when you've spent two or three months working on something there's a large amount of investment made by the artist (and, yeah, they're being paid - but I think we all know comics is a vastly undervalued medium in every way, so we're not multi-millionaires or anything). So to have that amount of your life dismissed with a 'meh'. Well, it's not pleasant.  Also - like watching someone get kicked in the nads - when my friends work is dismissed with a 'meh' I wince. I know exactly how it feels.

Not saying you're not entitled to your opinion (of something you may not have seen) just asking for a little fore-thought and maybe a little open mindedness.

- pj

" I follow the rule â??if youâ??ve got nothing nice to say, say nothing at allâ??. I suppose that an alright way to go? "

It's the axiom I've tended to go by. Although, you know, I enjoy it when I read conflicting opinions - I like to see that someone liked this but someone else hated it. That's fine, healthy even. It's the issue of people getting personal with creators or, worse, just downright dismissive of the work that people put into 2000AD.

-pj

I hate PJ and everything he's ever done.  It looks like he draws with a wet fish.








not really.

Meh.

Feh.

it also grate to have some artists and the writers here giving there advice, insider expertise and just some points on the story something which is much  appreciated by all i assume.

A message board is a bit like real life. Some people are just jerks. The problem is, where people who are carelessly giving out abuse because of some internal character flaw in real life get the kicking that they deserve, a message board protects the protagonists from such consequences.

I dunno - I've all but given up on commenting on the progs when I'm finding things are dull, but I'm not sure that's particularly helpful.  The threads all seem slightly more positive, but the reality is just the same - I'm reading a couple of stories out of the 5 and even they aren't thrilling me overmuch.  Philt comments were pretty dismissive, but then, without a "thought police" list of what you can and can't think for your £1.90, then what do you do? He's not been personally abusive about the creators, and hes put across his feelings on each strip and the prog in a manner whereby I got his jist, no matter how crude! (as an aside, I'd be the first to welcome a ban on swearing and cheekery, so long as the prog goes first).  

Maybe they should pull the forum if they don't want "honest but brutal" on the doorstep. PJs ideas are eminently sensible (and would give me the chance to ditch an rubbish username!), but you then have to enforce for 'idiots', and I think it'd get pretty murky there.  

2000ADs ethos has always been "say what you see", and while I can see that Philts comments are harsh, whats the line they cross over?  When Dark Jimbo got called a dick for a bit of potentially gun jumping predicting, who was crossing the line in that scenario? Woud you seriously see a forum mod appear in either of those situations on other boards?  And as others have said, most other boards are much more insane and harsh than this one, even with mods.

It's Rebellions call at the end of the day - its been a good forum - I'd say it's pretty well balanced, mostly positive and usually with someone willing to defend just about any criticism.  Thats obviously not how the creators feel , but then, if creators really dont like reading bad feedback, maybe they should avoid searching for it on the internet?  And if they do find uncalled for criticisms, maybe name calling isnt the best way forward?  I jsut dont think it would speak well of 2000AD if they felt that all their fans were so looney they couldnt let them talk! There's a few unhelpful critics?  Nuke the board from orbit....

Of course the alternative is mods, but would either Jimbos or Philts comments have triggered mods on other boards?  Neither were trolling or outright attacks on individuals.  anyway, off to change me name...

"A message board is a bit like real life. Some people are just jerks. The problem is, where people who are carelessly giving out abuse because of some internal character flaw in real life get the kicking that they deserve, a message board protects the protagonists from such consequences."

Well said. My rule on forums has always been 'if you say it in a forum you should be prepared to say it to their face' - with Bristol and Brum Conventions you never know who you could run into...

I think in the instance of Jimbo he was the sacrificial goat and that there was a distinct possibility that John Smith had been gradually wanting to say something for a while - I mean look at PJ's post he's right they'd been working on the strip for months and then people are flippantly 'mehing' about the whole thing rather than adding constructive intelligent comment I think that I would have felt pretty much the same, I just feel that John's anger was misdirected but valid towards others.

Well all this discussion seems to be pointing at is 'think before you type' which is highly unlikely and would remove some of the dynamism of the board. It's not as if people regret what they have posted 5 minutes later, it tends to be hours or days.

So then we have to turn to moderating and 'self-policing'. Perhaps we could have a 'report inappropriate/abusive post' button. And someone sensible to look at these reports and gently nudge/remind people who transgress.


Oh - and someone better warn The Cosh about sweary language! :>

"As far as I see it, swearing per se is not the problem. Like it or not, the audiences for 2000AD are adults and teenagers, not children. This board has a '15' certificate, so if 10 year olds can't get to it because of net nanny, I think that's probably a good thing. "

thank fuck for that!!!

Johnny- there's nothing much to see there. I'm certainly not about to defend philt, but I really don't think his post was offensive particularly. He didn't abuse any of the creators (unless I misread). Sure, he didn't qualify his comments this time but he has done in previews reviews. My reading of it is that he's tired of giving the same criticism each time and has lost the will to care why they don't work for him.
It's BoS all over again!

I think censorship of opinion (and that's what is being talked about here) is a dangerous route to take- except for bigotry and racial hatred etc, because it only takes one Tharg to stop giving a damn about the readers wants and start giving his mates from the pub plenty of 'work', bankrolled by a readership who feel they can't voice dissatisfaction.
Where do you draw the line?

"It's shit" - ++UNQUALIFIED STATEMENT- CENSORED++
ok- what about "It's boring" ? What about "It's boring shit". Is that qualified or not? What about "It's boring shit"?
When someone says something is shit, I usually take it to mean that the reasons are too many and varied to pour over as it simply doesn't warrant that amount of attention, in short- because it's shit.
Unfortunately, not all 2k readers are literature loving paid up members of MENSA, does that invalidate their opinion? does that make those that are superior? They pays the money, clever or not, and you can't gag people because they lack the education or intelligence to support their opinion with reasoned synopsis.

If he'd said "creator XYZ is a wanker and I hate him" then fair enough, off with his head! But the fact is he didn't- whether his post was lowbrow, knuckle-dragging level or not is immaterial. He's one voice. If everyone else disagreed with him I doubt there would have been any problem.
Ten Seconders and especially Dead Eyes have come in for an absolute pounding over the weeks from probably the majority on here. Is that the fault of the fans or the fault of the stories?
Creative types like artists writers and musicians will always be distracted along fights of fancy that they see as great, exciting and cutting edge. Whilst others look on bemused. I would have thought it was an editors job to control these creative urges to ensure the highest quality prog comes out rather than try to control the fans, who realistically, he has no real hold over at all (quite the reverse actually).

Would you expect Good service from a shop or restaurant if you stated a good or service was 'shit'?

I doubt it. You'd 'hopefully' attemmpt to articulate yourself, as you then may have some chance of redress or recourse.

That is what Tharg was asking for.

Everyone gets criticism sometimes and if you are published you expect it, but the way it's turned into quite personal comments is wholely unnecessary. (See BOS Debacle for details)

Oh well.. I'd better get back to drawing.. 2 pages a day right now...aaargh.

Rufus...procrastinating wildly...

"I think censorship of opinion (and that's what is being talked about here) is a dangerous route to take- except for bigotry and racial hatred etc, because it only takes one Tharg to stop giving a damn about the readers wants and start giving his mates from the pub plenty of 'work', bankrolled by a readership who feel they can't voice dissatisfaction.
Where do you draw the line? "

Let me repeat this, since you may have missed it above:

No-one would dare suggest that anyone here isn't allowed to express their opinion on the comic (or its contents) - whether they've paid or not - the question is, should this be the place for the overly negative harping that tends to erupt more often than not?

-pj

I'm now self employed but when I worked in an insurance office I got dogs abuse every day over repudiations, offers, policy interpretations. the weather, the time sheets, the coffee machine - why should paid creators be any different? And don't say because this is a public forum - I was once moaned at in the Sunday Mail Judge Column!

The fact that that this is a fan board (fan = fanatic) the compliments do flow regularly and surly the odd ya boo sucks is a small price to pay for all that gravy? I myself have suffered some creator's abuse (thanks Floyd!) and frankly it was water off a duck's back - better to be talked about than not be talked about!

So you're saying it's alright to be rude and uncivil to people because people were rude and uncivil to you in a different job?

I'm certainly not asking people to tell me I'm great (and, if you read my posts you'll see I'm at pains to point out that I enjoy balanced opinion - and if there're enough negative views of a thing then I may even concede the point. Maybe) what I'm hoping for is that the board can rise above the screaming, the shouting, the unhinged opinions, the instant dismissals of work yet to be seen, and the absolute rudeness and uncivility that can often be summed up with the words 'Haven't seen it, but it looks shit'.

Really, is that too much to ask?

-pj
ps In my naivety, I've always assumed 2000AD readers were a cut above normal people - I just figured, I read 2000AD (and have done all my life) and I'm a decent human being, surely all 2000AD readers are the same.

To be fair, PJ - can you point to a single example of "I haven't seen it, but... "?

Maybe I'm not that sensitive, but I didn't think the place was this bad or the negative criticism that prevalent.

Maybe part of the problem is that people are more likely to comment when they don't like something than when they are just happy with what's in the prog? The end result being an impression of mainly negative posts.

Honestly, I don't know whether a harder line on posts is the answer or not, the same with real name posts.

Personally, I wouldn't be that bothered about the opinions of anyone on the internet any more than I would be bothered about someone ranting on a street corner - but it's not my work being talked about, so it's easy for me to say that :)

- Steve

that PS is ludicrous pj. Its a bunch of people talking about comics, nobody is better than anyone else.

As Amadeus Cho would say, Chillax.

So you're saying it's alright to be rude and uncivil to people because people were rude and uncivil to you in a different job?

Seems reasonable!

I've never been rude or uncivil to you or anyone else PJ, but being devil's advocate I'd suggest it comes with the territory of being a published creator. Unless it's defamatory I don't see the issue - published creators in 2000ad have crossed many hurdles, been judged and passed by experts and paid for their efforts - why should some anonymous internet critic cause such concern?

I have no ambition be to a 2000ad writer (or artist!) mainly because I know I could never hack it, but if I were published I know I'd value the opinion of my editor far beyond that of some  yahoo with a chip on his shoulder.

Personally, I find I post more when the progs are rocking than when theys a sucking, but I suspect in general, it might well be some people only raise a voice to moan.

Philt seems to be at an extreme of feeling about the current progs (whether you agree with how he expresses that or not), and while this run hasnt been the best received on the board in comparison to some real popular offensives, I
 hadn't picked up on a sense of too much malcontent amongst the general populace, though maybe theyre on average just more positive than me at the moment, and its all relative!  

Numanti said:

"Also, Defoe back? Meh."

That's the most recent one.

And I KNOW there's an entire thread that really puts that single sentence into a different perspective, but, as a creator that dismissive swatting away of months of work really is soul destroying*. If it happened on alt.comics.2000AD, fair enough, on 2000adreview, that's fair too - on someone's blog? fair game. But I don't think it belongs on the official message board.
 
- pj
*Leigh Gallagher is the artist, I have no idea of how he feels about this - I'm talking about this purely from my own perspective.

I entirely understad your opinions, PJ, which are put in your usual reasonable and well-written way.  I also understand your feelings - it must be very gutting to put weeks of your life into something and just get a 'that sucks' response from someone.
  I'm not a creator, but I can't think of any rules that would make the board less hurtful for creators.    If I were a creator, I would either avoid the board, or just steel myself everytime I looked at it.  Would a beautifully written review that took someone ten minutes of great care to write, but which meant pretty much the same as 'this story is the worst ever published' be less painful to read than 'meh'?
   I was saddened by Matt's original post because, with a few exceptions, I like the free feel of this site

no problem using my real name of course,

Floyd Kermode

 "Ten Seconders and especially Dead Eyes have come in for an absolute pounding over the weeks from probably the majority on here. Is that the fault of the fans or the fault of the stories? "


 Its not anyones fault.


 Some strips have a broad appeal and others dont and quite a lot of what i like in the prog hasnt always  been everyone elses cup of tea but without  some of the less popular strips in the prog i may not have been such a fan of 2000ad.


 I like stuff that is different or quirky and i dont want to see stuff thats been tried and tested or see new strips that are written to a formula that dont challenge.

 I suppose its a case of how you define quality but i dont think popularity automatically means quality.

 Its all in the eye of the beholder and personally i want more Dead Eyes.

 It was a bit of a surprise that Kingdom  was so popular as i thought here we go again another minority interest strip that i like that others wont get.


 I have spent the best part of a day on one smallish drawing of Beachy Head and its still not finished.


  "ITS SHIT !!"


  Bastards.


 

"that PS is ludicrous pj. Its a bunch of people talking about comics, nobody is better than anyone else. "

yeah, you're right. Still, I know I'd rather spend my time chatting to people into 2000AD than people into football.

-pj

yeah, you're right. Still, I know I'd rather spend my time chatting to people into 2000AD than people into football.

Shows you what you know. Some of us are into both. UNITED! UNITED!

I'm not asking for any special treatment as a creator - and, in fact, I tend to take the review threads better than many of my peers (oh sod it, all right - I admit it, I actually enjoy some instand dismissal of my work, it means the only way I can go is up)

But my purpose here is:

a) to suggest a couple of simple rules (see my first post) that, I think, will instantly make people slightly more considerate in their posting.

and - SEPARATELY  - as though posted by a different person -
 
b) let people know what it's like from the other side, as a creator -

Would people prefer if this board was creator -free? Then none of this would be an issue? or would you prefer a board that creators felt comfortable moving about in? Yes, it may mean that some of the more rambunctious members might have to reign in the colourful metaphors they enjoy but it would also make this message board unique on the internet in that there would be no distinction between fan and pro - only a bunch of people who share a common interest in 2000AD.

What's interesting to me, is that the people who I am always sure have thought about what they've typed, who don't indulge in the game of out-hyberboling other posters in negativity are also the first to say 'yes, I have no problem giving up my anonymity'.

And with that, I'll withdraw from the thread - in case I accidentally muddy the waters further.

-pj

(dips toe in carefully)

surely a forum is there for debate? we dont all like the same stuff. I dont like dante, thats not a criticism to the creator .its just not my cup of tea.
the bloke at my comic shop hates (yes hates)dredd.i didnt belay him about the head with my toddler i just smiled and paid for my "origins" gn.
ther have been a few examples when i've expressed an opinion that some may find defamatory (b.o.s.2&3) but it is MY opinion.
   there have been some recent interviews of creators/artists slating the online communinity if they have criticised their work.

there are bitchy forums out there(ebay) but as i stated in one of my first ever posts this place is on the whole a nice place. there ARE hiccups on the site .
  we have fun,some threads last forever and deservedly so ,some die a death and deservedly so (a few of mine!!!)
   getting back on track.....we should be allowed to voice our opinon without a creator/artist throwing there dolly out of the pram if they dont like it...after all,how many have told us the tale of being rejected time after time before being accepted.good job they didnt have internet forums in the 70's or we'd not have a prog!

Lets get a moderator it would be a shame if the board got pulled because of a minority  of baiters...democracy now!

well obviously 2000AD readers are better than footie fans :) Not Newcastle fans though. We're delusional mentalists!!!
All I meant really was I think most of the people on here are good people, and they mean well and they love 2000AD. Ive been guilty of negative comments in the past, but half the time it was down to being in a bad mood, theres a good few posts I would delete if I had the chance.
The level of dismissiveness(real word?) you talk about is disheartening, but I don't think it's the norm on this board. On youtube, however...:)

I'm Stephen Watson of Paisley fame. It was never my intention to hide.

Unlike PJ who could be PJ O'Rourke, PJ Yamas, PJ Harvey, PJ Hogan or one of the many, many other celebrity PJs out there.

BTW Bad Andy Dundee UTD are losing and costing Rangers the league. That and their own 2-0 defeat.

yeah, you're right. Still, I know I'd rather spend my time chatting to people into 2000AD than people into football.

Do football fans ever sing songs insulting one of their own players, during a match?  If so, has the manager ever grabbed hold of a megaphone and shouted something like: "Look, Harry's a professional footballer, and just because he's missed the goal all season there's no need for songs containing that kind of language!  Now, get out of the stadium, and don't come back until you've learnt some manners!  Your season tickets, sorry, opinions, aren't doing this club, or Harry, or the shareholders, any good."

Maybe it was always a bad idea for Rebellion  /2000 AD to host their own customers in such an open way.

On the other hand - they could turn it into a positive by claiming not to be afraid of their fans.

And, of course, Rebellion / 2000 AD could set a better example by not having a column in the Megazine (of old, but still perhaps influential) featuring one of their creators slagging off lots of other creators, and the fans.  Or have that same creator write strips denegrating comic fans. Or publish large expensive tombs like Thrill Power Overload that contains some very candid and negative opinions from creators about some other creators.  Or then there are the candid interviews published in the Megazine.  (Of course, it's subjective: I presume those criticisms have been deemed more worthwhile than the ones that cause a fuss here.)

Still, it's all seeming a bit pot and kettle, now that I think about it.

Frankly, I've never swum in a nicer cesspool.  I love this messageboard and all it's strange people.  

The messageboard may be demoralising for a writer/artist reading the review threads, but if you don't want a frank (and sometimes blunt, sometimes annoying, sometimes pissy) opinion as well as the more well thought out ones, stay well clear.  Just read the selected letters in the prog or what Tharg passes on for the spot varnished truth.

From a readers perspective, I haven't posted any reviews on the board this year because I've been very dissapointed in some of the people who work on the comic and to some degree tired of the abuse. I didn't say I thought X artist was great because I wanted to suck up to him, just as I didn't say Y strip was rubbish because suddenly 'I had a vendetta' against writer Z.  I just wanted to say what I thought and talk about it with fellow readers.

Getting your rants and raves off your chest has to be better than just suffering in silence and dropping the prog because you're fed up.

For what its worth, PJ, I've tried being constructive in my criticism to droids who I know are on the board about their stuff, including you. Filtering out the negative and adding in the positive.  Frankly, I've found its easier just to lie and say it's great or shut up. Otherwise Im made to feel like I've just kicked a puppy or I risk provoking a nobgasm.  Really, I'd like to be able to say what I think on a review thread that will be taken for what it is, by whoever wants to read it.

If someone says something is shit, couldn't the droid just ask them for a more thought out answer and then accept that?  Even if they are saying it's still shit, and here is a list of reasons.   I don't honstly see how they can change people's minds on their work by arguing or berating them though.

If the board goes, it'll be back to reading John Wagner Dredd's in WHSMiths for me.  Sorry, but it was the board that won back my loyalty to the comic.

my daughter has some noddy pj's!

my daughter has some noddy pj's!

...two pairs!

I once said that the horse from Second City Blues deserved to die.

Must not get sucked in!

Ah, never ever intended to accuse anyone of hiding - pseudonyms are a long held tradition on the internet, in some cases neccessary and, in almost all cases, harmless - but, as I've said a few times now, the two rules in panel and pixel and the engine have made them pleasurable places for fan and pro to mix, and I thought it would've been a nice model for this place too.

Ignoring all the silly alternative PJs, I'm PJ Holden (Paul Jason) who draws for 2000AD, has had food poisoning this week, is expecting his second child in a couple of weeks (well, my wife is) and is a long established fan of 2000AD. I've been here so long I'd sort of forgotten that most people wouldn't assume the PJ is the same PJ as PJ Holden, and will now, go off and correct it.

Also, I don't understand football.

-pj

On the whole how 'creators' respond to criticism; my experience has always been that if you have any sort of a profile they'll always be flak heading you're way. Its not nice but there's little that you can do about it. So its best to just take comfort in the old adage its better to be disliked than ignored whilst making sure to search for the nuggets of justified criticism and act on them. If you try and 'confront' you're detractors (which I am sorry to say I did a fair few times on this board regarding my columns for The Nexus) it almost always gets messy.

PJ raises the good point about what the limits are on what is essentially a corporate site. There's no easy answer for that, but it would be a shame for the board to go.

{i}"Let me repeat this, since you may have missed it above: "{/i}

PJ- I could take that in a way which it may or may not have been intended. On first impression, I felt you were tying to belittle me as ignorant or stupid.   Now I haven't done anything ecept give a reason opinion on what is going on. I wasn't involved in the arguement and have to wonder- "what did I do to deserve that?"

I may have picked it up wrong. which illustrates how easy it is to pick up posts wrong. On the other hand. You may well have meant it that way...

"Sorry, but it was the board that won back my loyalty to the comic."

I agree about the value of the board. These days, I often feel that my main motivation for reading the prog is that I have something in common with my fellow boarders to drivel on about.

The character of the board is no more or less bad-tempered or critical than it's ever been, so where Matt's "skating on thin ice recently" remark comes from is a mystery to me.

Leave the board alone, or close it down. Neuter it, and I don't want to come here any more. Be assured, however, that I will be cancelling my sub if I lose this board. I fucking love this  board.

OK ... so we're a small number of internet comic geeks that might be insignificant in the scheme of 2000AD's overall readership, but remember that we're also the comic's advocates and evangelists.

We're the ones who will stand up for Judge Dredd down the pub whenever anyone mentions how shit the film was. We're the ones reminding people that, yes, the comic is still going. We're the ones producing fanzines, sneaking onto other people's boards and shoe-horning references to the Galaxy's Greatest in wherever the slightest opportunity arises.

And if we want to be a bit bloody snarky about a strip if we think it's substandard, then why the hell shouldn't we? It's because we care about the damn comic, not because we're trying to score internet discussion board points for a cool put down or to make ourselves look big and clever.

And I'll swear as much as I fucking well like while I'm doing it. As has been so eloquently noted already, 2000AD is not aimed at kids and hasn't been for many years. If it's OK to put swearing up to and including the dreaded F word in the comic itself, then no-one is going to tell me I can't use it here.

Phew. Rant over.

Cheers

Jim

Italicsoff for non-IE browsers.  (The trick is to close them more than once, thusly: </i></i></i></i>. I usually fire about eight of the little buggers, just to be sure.  Then I nuke the site from orbit.)

Regarding what Jim was saying about the critics also being the advocates: I always advertise 2000 AD to my (approx.) 200 students, and this year I tried to get my 3rd year project teams to create a 2000AD database that could handle both structure and content, and expand to cope with multiple gifts, double covers and other oddities.

Of course, in doing all that, I've probably created exactly ZERO new squaxx.

It would be interesting to know if there was actually any direct negative effect on sales, caused by this site.  Or creators that have refused to work for the comic anymore because of this site, or threatened to refuse to.  I mean, any negative effect other than hurt feelings (without wanting to be dismissive of those entirely).

I seem to recall, on numerous occasions, that Tharg himself has slagged off stories which have previously appeared in 2000ad and not lived up to expectations. I don't know if his current incarnation is guilty of this, but it's happened often enough and I don't think it would be too difficult to find some examples.

personally I thought Dead Signals ending was very intriguing (no sucking up intended) I'm not going to the MCM but I would like to ask a question if you don't mind?

Did you deliberately write the story based on multiple personality syndrome, schizophrenia? Reason I'm asking is that having dealt with people suffering from this in the past there is a condition where the patient goes almost catatonic and will then claim to have been somewhere else and cannot remember anything about what happened in 'real life' or  I Reading too deep into the script. I took it that the ending was deliberately ambiguous and that the character was more in favour of being who he wasn't than what he was.

That would put it tantalisingly close to 'Total recall' territory MP!

Total Recall is old hat - make a reference to Life On Mars.  That's what the kids can remember this week, the ADHD-riddled buffoons.

I know what you mean but I thought it deeper than that, in a sense an homage to Tv an film and the way it sucks you in. Did anyone ever question why he was halucinating in a TV show, was this story making comment on our culture and the embitterment of fame, the way tv can turn you into something you are not?

Short answer, no - I based that part on a previous idea I had a few years ago - basically the same thing of a fantastic sci-fi life and a horribly mundane life,  each of which thought the other was real - which in turn probably owed a lot to Warren Ellis' Dark Blue. Watching you-know-what starring John Simm probably put me back in that frame of mind too.

"the way tv can turn you into something you are not?"

Transvestism?

Reality TV is in everything these days, so if he hallucinated he was 'big in TV', why not hallucinate that element of popular culture?
I liked the Odin reference with the bloke with one eye and a crow, whose name escapes me - does the crow represent the all-seeing eye of those television probe-things?
Also, I read the last two week's progs in one sitting, but in the wrong order, so I can't really offer a decent opinion of Dead Signal at this stage, but I was enjoying it before then, but thought the ending a bit rushed.  Presumably because I'd missed an episode.

Above comments aimed at Ex-Larf, obviously.

I think that to a certain extent we have been getting away with murder on the board over the years, but I still feel that Cyber-Matt's post was unfair to the majority of boarders. To threaten to remove the board in order to make us behave seems a particularly harsh thing to do.

Still, I would be in favour of more constructive criticism and less vague moaning. It might encourage people to share their opinions which can only be a good thing.

I dont think that making boarders use their real name instead of a psuedonym makes any difference though. Whether my name is really Jared Katooie or not my posts will still be the same well-meaning, rambling nonsense they've always been.

2000AD's creators and editor have no idea what a great resource they have here.  It makes the comic look vital, alive, engaging and free-spirited.  Its members frequently attempt to publicise the comic to others in the target market.  

The short-sighted attitude of some creators towards their most ardent fans is far more of a turn-off.  It turned me off my subscription, for example, a decision I reached after reading that Gordon Rennie "fan" script, which coupled with a few other things made me feel "sad" for reading a comic.

do you think that in a roundabout way life on mars, the
atrix, total recall etc popular cultural references towards escapism actually added flavour to the work. There are certain people who've more or less skated on the surface of the story and quite blatantly said copycat and unoriginal without looking deeper. I don't think you can find any kind of work in any media at the moment that does not lift references from something else and maybe that's because our culture is changing people communicate differently reference things more closely than they used to so therefore they tend to remember things more. Revering to these references in movies, stories and comics tends to enhance and empathise with the audience?

I think what I'm waffling to say here is that would you say its unfair of people to critise and say you have plagarised the ideas from otherstories and by return defend dead signal as an extension and elaboration of those stories, another tale to add to the mythos of escapism in fiction?

I wouldn't say I plagiarised anything, but on the other hand it belongs to a subset of stories involving artificial and/or 'dream' realities, so people are going to see similarities to other stories in that subset, especially ones involving people in comas.

Beyond that, I'm a little uncomfortable talking about deeper meanings, because in a way that's the reader's job, and also because I don't want to give any spoilers just in case it ever comes back. But like I say, if you stop me at a convention I'll be happy to talk about anything at length.

thanks Al I'll probably take you up on that offer if ever our paths cross, and ta for an engaging conversation I found it very interesting to hear your POV. Cheers.

"Well, I don't think the board needs to die, just needs to take a good long hard look at itself and ask what exactly it wants to be when it grows up? valued member of society, or a little git sitting around making sarcy comments all the time (as ever, Simpson's quote to the rescue: 'Dude, were you being sarcastic?' 'I don't know')

Further: just because there are worse places out there, doesn't mean this this place is perfect - no where is perfect. "

I never said this place was perfect, but I think equating this board to the sarky little git in the back row is a bit extreme. I think we can all agree that the unfavourable comments are the exception rather than the rule, and we've all managed to maintain that atmosphere without needing to be censored or moderated.

I've been reading 2000ad for the last sixteen years at least (pshaw to you elitist 'reading from issue one' galoots!), and I have to say that the messageboard rekindled my interest when it had been waning due to what I felt was a lower quality of storytelling in a book that had become rather unadventurous.  This forum suggested a vitality to the comic that sadly isn't always present in the pages, though I'd dearly like it to be once again - without this place, I'd probably have jacked the book a couple of years ago.

Group hug?

All the same, there's not much in the way of aggressive moderation here, and Matt's own words suggest that he feels that the messageboard is seperate from Rebellion/2000ad, but that it should also toe the company line.  I don't think someone telling us to keep our metaphorical feet off the table would be that much of a blow to free speech, and reader mods would be a good way to ease into the whole idea.  If Rebellion/2000ad want the board to be a certain way, they should work towards making it so, rather than only making their voice heard to express disappointment when it falls short of the ideal.

"I'm a little critical of some of the criticism of the criticism of the criticism of the criticism of the criticism here. Or I would be if it didn't make me an INTERNET FASCIST. "

 [I have quoted from your post but you werent being serious but i have come across this elsewhere and i just need to say my bit]


 That would be free speech as well.


 All free speech means is having the right to say something in the first place [within certain parameters] .If i criticise or attack something that someone else says it does not make me anti free speech.Quite the opposite as i can say what i like  and then if i say something someone else does not like then i am prepared to be attacked possibly or whatever.

 And so it goes on.


 Why am i saying this ?

 Because i talk about it a lot and i have had this pot-kettle-black- accusation[if hypocrisy isnt involved] more than once  when i have been critical of someone else and been accused of being anti free speech but its missing the point of free speech.

 It would only be true if i was saying that anyone else can *not* say something in the first place

 One of my posts here about something was censored once as there was a dirty great big grey spoiler all over it that i had nothing to do with.

 I dont see the arguement being about censorship ,if anything its about not saying enough rather than saying nothing or not being allowed to say something.

 Its just a request to extrapolate on something rather than just saying something is shit and nothing else because if you can be bothered to buy the prog and post here then what is so difficult about doing that ?

 

 No one can say they dont like something and not b e able to explain why .Nonsense.I always know why i dont like something.

 Otherwise you might just as well go into WHS and speed read it for nothing and say DEad Signal -Shit ,Dead Eyes-shit ,Judge Dredd - MEH [whatever that means]  nah cant be bothered -next.


 

 

I may be being a bit thick here but the latest prod didnt have Revere, Finn or Wireheads in it.

Oh never mind. I liked the Prog in question so I will go and comment in the thread in question.

Tweak: I think Philt was making unflattering comparisons (unjustified beyond a certain haircut) for comedic effect to suggest the comic was mis-firing as it has sporadically done in the past - inevitable with an anthology.

He's gone now, so I guess we'll never really know.

Eeh Tweak I think the implication was that the modern thrills were a bit similar to those past.

The other problem if this board died is that I'd have to get my witty observations and indeed many strip understandings from elsewhere - and that's totally unregulated!

"Numanti said:

"Also, Defoe back? Meh."

That's the most recent one. "

To be fair, that's not exactly  someone saying somethings shit without having any prior sight  or knowledge of it - they've seen Defoe - sure the  new series might surprise them, but "meh" is their honest thought on its return. If I saw "Wireheads 3" advertised, I'd feel fairly confident in suggesting I wasnt that fired up about seeing it again.


Me, i cant wait for defoe, and said so along with shedloads of others in the prog 1589 thread - is that enthusiasm all undone by one unconvinced poster? Is it better for Rebellion to burn all that enthusiasm to stop a single "meh" being heard?

 

(Here he comes...)

There was a time, a year or three ago, when I was guilty of some pretty incandescent reactions to Bad Reviews myself.  What can I say?  I was younger, dumber, and much more easily insulted.  Even now I still get good and gloomy if I spot a particularly vitriolic bit of criticism, but â?? this is important â?? *thatâ??s not your problem*.  It doesnâ??t mean you (as fans) shouldnâ??t be allowed to criticise, and it doesnâ??t mean you should feel remotely guilty for having a less-than-positive opinion.  I mention it here simply in the spirit of long-overdue conciliation with Certain Of Your Number, and because this here brainfart which follows is all about Honesty:

Everyone has the right to be honest.  Everyone has the right to criticise a product which theyâ??re loyally paying for, and this messageboard â?? failing a nice big pub conveniently located between all of us â?? is probably the best place to do so on All Matters Tooth.

Buuuut this *is* an â??officialâ? board.  Never forget that.  Itâ??s part of 2000ADâ??s Public Relations presence, and so we users have to be a little bit realistic.  Not necessarily about the things we say, but certainly about the way we express them.

I donâ??t believe anyone â?? least of all Tharg â?? is actually suggesting a moratorium on all negative comments.  And I absolutely agree with several of you â?? whoâ??ve given an enthusiastic thumbs-up to the spirit of anarchy and impropriety that defines this place â?? that we donâ??t want it turning it to some dreary Toe The Company Line toilet where the slightest hint of cheek is grounds for an instant ban.

But nobody with the slightest sense is going to sit-by and allow their Public Face â?? and thatâ??s what this place is, for 2000AD â?? to get snarled-up with deleterious attitudes or a culture of negativity.

You might think your companyâ??s CEO is A Big Festering Arsegike, but you probably wouldnâ??t say so in a shareholderâ??s meeting.   Equally, saying â??Meh, this is shitâ? might indeed be a perfectly valid gut reaction to something, but you canâ??t expect to get away with it in on an Official Website.  

Happily, this neednâ??t be a problem, because you *can* get away with it if you express the same sentiments in a smarter way â??- which has the added benefits of making the Board look better, making *you* look better, and (just for the record) making all of us thin-skinned creators a little less inclined to cry.  

My point is simply this:  It should be completely possible to be Honest without also being a Nipple.

My second point â?? at the risk of sounding like a big hippy â?? is that we should try and remember that weâ??re ardent fans of 2000AD first, and critics of underwhelming strips second.  Letâ??s feel the love and soothe the pain, not the other way round.

Sorry. I know.  I just did a little bit of sick in my own mouth too.

(A side-point: Iâ??m a little out of touch with names and whatnot at the mo, so I canâ??t say this with absolute certaintyâ?¦  But it occurs to me that almost all the people in this thread who are protesting any change in the culture of the messageboard are the ones who I *already* associate with erudite, well-considered, well-explained or at the very least non-dismissive and non-bombastic posts, even when being negative.  Which â?? unless I misread Thargâ??s glorious intentions completely â?? are exactly the sort of people we donâ??t want to change at all.)

Peter- there is no such thing as free speech.
Nor should there be, if someone had beat the tar out of Hitler for being a rascist sack of bile the world may have been a better place.
I'm not saying people should be ok to get tore into creators- not at all. That's personal insults and isn't valid.
Philt had already expressed his concerns about these stories in at least two previous reviews. Do you think he'd have changed his mind, seeing as how the strips are by and large pretty much still the same in most peoples opinions?
There are also many people who are not articulate enough, or simply feel intimidated by 'high brow' debate. Some don't really analyse why things are shit- it's enough that they are. It's a big world and we aren't all the same.

The truth is that he didn't abuse any creators, and I believe the real cause of all this to be the spat with JS. I think something that's being overlooked is that philt and jimbo have been somewhat the victims here as well. I would hazard a guess that philt may well stop buying the prog now, if he's feeling that badly about it anyway- then tharg himself has a go at him. That's a reader gone. Added to what Dudley has said it may well be significant. The last time we had a 'to hell with the fans' attitude at 2000ad the comic eventually nearly went the way of the dodo.

Tbh, if you've went on teh internet, all guns blazing after a few bevvies and a spliff, you're inviting it. People thinking before they post has to apply to everyone or no-one. Unless you want to foster an atmosphere of 'them' and 'us'.

Cheers Si, that's a few weeks of creator sourced letters quotes nailed down.

 Yes you are right in the sense that there isnt absolute free speech  or there is in some ways as the BNP have a platform for better or for worse.

 I am very glad everyone is not he same as well.



 This is my idea of a compromise:




 I say something like "I am not enjoying it " or "I dont like the art " or "I dont get it".It doesnt say very much at all but its not disrespectful if you see what i mean.



 Has Philt left ? there was a mention that"he has gone now" a couple of times or something like that .

 Was he banned ?

 It seems a bit harsh if he was unless he left voluntarily.

 How does anyone know he has gone ?


 What has happened to being able to move on from something and making a fresh start ?


 It all seems a bit final.

Ohhh I seeeeee. up to speed now.

Meh! Oh well. didnt really talk to Philt any hoo. seemed IMHO like he would pick a argument in an empty room. and not in a cool or at least amusing way like Jonny Eyebrows or Funt Solo do either.

And not as well meaning in a random way as Peter Wolf or my self

Does this mean we are not allowed to slag off Big Dave or Mark Millar any more?

Well, I'll take PJ's suggestion and "uncloak," though I suspect anybody who cares about such things knows my identity already... :-)

Oddly, while this site is not accessible to me from work (thanks to Rebellion's naughty videogames), DC's is.  Today, I visited their site to see what the scoop with Jim Shooter possibly leaving/being sacked from LSH was.  I have to say, Time/Warner turns a blind eye to some pretty ugly vitriol in comparison to what goes on here.

I guess that it's tough to find the best words for situations... I'm sure Jim McCarthy, for instance, is a great fellow, but I really find his art incredibly unappealing.  I love Bix Barton, but it succeeded in spite of his art, not because of it.  I'd like to think, should he ever see any of those Thrillpowered Thursdays that mention his work, he understands that criticism of art isn't the same as criticism of the artist.  (Then again, you never know, I really seem to have offended Alan McKenzie with my opinion on Luke Kirby's copyright, which I thought was expressed pretty mildly...)

On the other hand, I think that dissing Mark Millar, personally, should be an inalienable right of all squaxx dek Thargo.

Spurrier, too, if he doesn't quit wasting his time servicing decrepit old Marvel trademarks like the Silver Boring Surfer and give us some more Lobster Random.

AS Si says, the real core of the problem is the fact this is on the official site - I was wondering what DC or marvel have as an equivalent, so cheers for that Grant - I was too scared to look! :)


So despite all my arguing on this thread, I can see where Rebellion are coming from, I just can't see a simple solution (other than "anarchy can work" if we are all good people, which is true, if you accept that we are actually 95% good people and cope with the 5% that either arent, or are pissed enough to not be on that day).

Accepting that Philts coment have been modded in a different environment, how could he have expressed his despairing opinion in another way that wasnt 'offensive'?

Heres what he said

"Dredd - meh

Revere - incomprehensible goth bollox

Finn - incomprehensible murky bollox

Wireheads - incomprehensible (but thankfully brief) bollox.

Quite possibly the shitest prog in a decade."

Philts comments are very harsh, but he makes his point well enough - its a prog with stories that remind him of the 90s, drawing comparisons between each current strip and ones from the 'bad old days'.  Its not just a "THIS IS SHIT" post, but his frustration is there for all to see sure.

So if he'd moderated his language and added a bit more than a meh, how much better could it have been?

"Dredd - totally uninvolving

Revere - incomprehensible goth nonsense

Finn - incomprehensible murky nonsense

Wireheads - incomprehensible (but thankfully brief) nonsense.

Quite possibly the worst prog in a decade."

Its a puzzler for Rebellion for sure - moderate, and risk looking afraid of opinions or pull the board, and look even worse.  Let it carry on, but with your creators getting a knocking and actually paying to host people bad mouthing you...  I honestly don't know what I'd do in this situation.

I would just echo Paul, Jim and Dudleys comments about how the board has personally re-invigorated my relationship with the prog.  Some of these long runs where theres been nothing to grab me?  The board saw me through those and has often cemented my subscription far more effectively than the actual progs have.  I like to think I'm the sort who always thinks about why he doesn't like stuff, and attempts to articulate it 'properly' (when I can be bothered at all to do it nowadays).  Hasn't stopped me being insulted by the writers in print for it!

As Dog says, this feels like the old Megazine reprint debacle days, where the fans were getting flak for being annoyed that things weren't all sunshine in Camp Tharg.  IO can understand Rebellion beign annoyed at hosting vitriol, but really, if you are going to allow opinions on the comic, you are going to get opinions you dont like...

I suppose the best you could do is add a sticky to say something along the lines of "we value your opinon, but note this is the official site, and Tharg is waiting with his Regellian hotshots"... but I'm not sure thats just intimidation of opinion - possibly valid on an officail site sure, but how does that look?  Aand if someones as downcast as Philt is on the prog, I dont think hes going to feel that much like moderating his opinion anyway - certainly, Tharg shouting at him doesn't seem to have changed his opinion any, but may have lost a 31 years standing customer.

I'm watching you, Tweak...

Assuming it is philt's comments that have prompted this and looking at his recent posts I don't think it's solely his most recent prog review, more the straw that broke the camel's back.

I've seen this kind of situation out in the real world recently which has led me to the following conclusions...

Rebellion, like the rest of us, is feeling the pinch and if it's not losing money now, it soon will be. Therefore it's looking for ways to save cash. Employing a moderator will not save cash. Getting shot of the message board altogether probably will. As several people have already stated there is no part of the internet untouched by unconstructive, negative posts. The cynical part of me firmly believes that 'the management' is looking for excuses to shut the thing down. Even if this board becomes a neutered shell of its former self, chock full of glowing reviews and advertising spam, they will still find a reason to do so if that's what's been decided.
I agree with Jim. Turn the board into that and lose this reader for good.

I do feel a certain empathy with the creators here that have had some nasty reviews. Look on the bright side chaps, at least your critics don't stumble up to you at 1am, smashed out of their brains and tell you to your face why they think you're shit while you're trying to work (do they?!). All creative industries breed strong opinion. That's the best thing about them as well as the worst and you need a thick skin to deal with it sometimes. Just remember that there's no such thing as bad publicity. x

I sometimes wonder if it would be better if the reviews were held over until stories were finished. Fans then would be able to see more what the creators intended. Due to its weekly nature reviews are always going to be speculative as to a stories conclusion. Perhaps we could have a review of reviews of each story when its finished ie week 1 I enjoyed the set up but was slightly confused as to the motives of x character, week 2 I thought the story continued well but I was still confused by etc etc.

I think also it would be good if the poll thingy was brought back ie listing the stories in order of preference and giving a brief reason why you liked them. What worked what didn't. I think we should focus on the positive because no one sets out to make a bad comic.

When I started this post I was pretty sure of the reaction it would get to Matt's comments. Looking through and reading them all the majority are constructive, passionate, intelligent and well written. I feel this thread does all of us credit.

Tanky's comments above have spurned me to write this. Shutting down the board will not save money for Rebellion, it doesn't cost to host a forum especially if you are hosting your site on your own server, and if you have your own server you undoubtably have someone creating your web prescence which I'm sure Rebellion, being the company that it is have this facility. With regards to moderation I've never yet come across a forum that does not have harsh comment towards the subject matter of the product or service. Moderation only occurs if it gets out of hand and in the last few years there have on occasion been instances when people or posts have been removed from the board. So what I'm trying to say is that this board is moderated, not just by Rebellion in a loose way, but also by us - if someone is piss-arsing around then nine times out if ten we will either killfile them, totally ignore them or tell them where to go.

But you know what, I went into the chat room last night and guess what there were ten people in there - ten! Why? Because this thread has heated up such passionate debate. I cannot wait until the next Prog, I cannot wait until I can comment - because my interest in 2000AD at the moment is on fire! There's the saying 'there's no such thing as bad publicity' and I think in this instance it's true, even though there are some terrible crtics out there, and that is what's fuelled this debate, as Si Spurrier mentioned in his post the majority of people who have posted on this thread are the ones that care, are constructive, and can string a sentence together in such a way as to voice and opinion.

In marketing terms we are the 'core-audience' on a marketing target we are the bull's eye, the die hards - no matter what happens we still read the Prog. Start to lose us and that target get's smaller, harder to hit. I once worked for Emap and was involved in the Sports publications, a passionate pastime if ever there was one, and I remember having a discussion with one of the publishers about Athletics Weekly and how the die hard running community were there biggest critics and it was difficult to turn around negativity towards the magazine, in essence they nit-picked the publication, passed comment - constructive mind - and generally kept the mag on it's toes, these people set a benchmark for quality. But what she was more concerned with was that they were hitting the bull's eye, but in turn it was turning off the other readers, the ocassionals who pick up the mag in-store on and off, and the people who should be reading the magazine but have been turned off by such an anal approach to detail, people who were unaware of the mag and most importantly people who picked up the mag and  were turned off by the core audience who sent in their sometimes inane letters and complaints every month. I'm wondering if Rebellion are having issues with us in a similar way, they want to move 2000AD forward but feel that they will 'upset' the core audience with such moves and if you do upset your core audience, nevermind how passionate they are, they divorce themselves from the magazine and then there really would be a problem because like it or not you need your core audience. 2000AD are lucky because they have no real direct competition - meaning there is no other weekly anthology comic in the UK - and in a market where I expect the margins are low this is a godsend. They also have a rich back catalogue which they have exploited, (and I say this in a positive way), in such a way that they have brought fans back into the fold, many of us on this board I expect. Rebellion have done an amazing job I mean we're all here now discussing a British Sci-Fi comic that has lasted over 30 years I think that's a mean feat for anyone to achieve.

There are always going to be some bad eggs in the box, some who take freedom of speech to mean insult anyone and everything say what you think and bugger the consequences. They always spoil it for everyone else. Don't let them do it in this instance.

What I will say to Rebellion is this: don't close the board, talk to us instead, voice your concerns, don't treat us like children, respect us like the fans we are. If you have concerns about the message board then this is a message board post a thread up voicing your concerns and do it in such a way that it's respectful towards us, and if it is the case that we are dulling the sheen on your products then why not get us involved - host some vox-pop sessions, show us what you intend to do, get feedback - you don't have to go along with it, but you may find it enlightening. We don't bite.

So, Olive Branch extended, I started this thread after Matt's comments. Matt I'm asking if you could embellish us on some of your comments and maybe enter into a discussion with us as to your concerns. In return I would ask boarders to be civil in reply. I don't want to lose this board.

Real names? Right you are.
My name is Leviathan Strange, and I... what?

*sigh*

Oh, alright then. Matt it is.

I agree with the general idea of "don't act like a dick", but is the average dick even aware he's acting like one?

This edict should apply equally to everyone, too. I can recall at least one occasion in the past where a creator has embarked on an epic spree of dickery, and the hand of Tharg was nowhere to be seen.

For what it's worth, I work on a public-facing technical support desk (alright, a call centre), and practically every customer I speak to tells me that the company I work for, and occasionally that I personally, am the worst thing in the world ever. I'd love it if the CEO would tell them that because they weren't nice to me, they couldn't use the helpdesk, but that's never going to happen. Mind you, I still hate my job and I'm seriously considering going to work in Aldi instead, so that's probably not the best comparison...

Thank fuck you've all got icons - I have no idea who any of these people are.  Go back to your net-names, please, for the love of Grud.  It's like some kind of Dead Signal nightmare: nothing is what it seems.  Put the masks back on!

Linton Porteous
aka Funt Solo

"I sometimes wonder if it would be better if the reviews were held over until stories were finished."

Or: perhaps when a story ends its run, it gets another thread. Considered reviews are actually fairly rare here, but knee-jerk "I just finished the Prog and here's what I think" stuff is rife. That's not to say immediacy isn't useful - it can be - but I'm sure "Tharg" would also like to know how stuff stood up in its entirety.

Good examples of this for me are Leatherjack and Stone Island. I didn't really care for either story in weekly installments, but read in one go, the former is a typically exciting Smith Hollywood production, and the latter is a gung-ho splatterfest that actually works really well (if, as said in the collected edition, a bit of a guilty pleasure).

"What I will say to Rebellion is this: don't close the board, talk to us instead"

Mm. Maybe one of the guys will start up such a thread. Open dialogue between Rebellion and this set of somewhat hardcore fans could actually prove extremely useful to both groups of people.

tsk !  i stay off board for 3 days & what happens ?!

now i'm confused with peoples names. Theres a couple of boarders we see at Bristol that refuse to tell us their board name. I figured early on that anonymity was all too much effort.

so, shall i away to the review board & start complaining then ?

this thread is full of spoilers

it's making me very unhappy as i haven't read the prog for a couple of weeks

can someone ban the people who are doing this?

Johnny (Johnny) Stress

'Linton Porteus' is the kind of name that nobody would believe was real.

That is all.

get outta here! that a real name??

I think it's okay to be pedantic about my own name: it's Porteous.

Apart from that, you're right, dammit.  Bastards!

---

I worked for some banana farmers in Oz once, and the introductions went exactly like this:

Ozzie Banana Farmer #1: "What's your name?"
Me: "Linton"
Ozzie Banana Farmer #2: "Fruzzbeam?"
Me: "No, Linton"
Ozzie Banana Farmer #1: "Limbaum?"
Me: "No, Linton"
Ozzie Banana Farmer #2: "Aw, we'll jist call ya Bill"

And they did, the entire time I worked there.

Were they philosphers by any chance?

"Is your name not Bruce?"
"No it's Michael."
"That's gonna cause a little confusion."
"Mind if we call you Bruce to keep it clear?"

Part of what I don't understand is the problem with this board being on the 'official site'. Does anyone really think that the views expressed on it are representative of Rebellion?
I don't think so. But who do the creators complain to if someone is (possibly unfairly) slagging off their work? Rebellion. Let the creators come on here and defend their work if they are that bothered. But don't come on, have a tizzy fit and then run off to Rebellion complaining if the argument didn't go the way they planned.

I don't think the argument that people will go elsewhere will work either. People do end up here because it is the official site - people who would probably never have thought to sign up and chat would have found their way here after checking out the official line. They wouldn't look elsewhere because, sadly, 2000ad isn't really big enough to have a vibrant non-official site. 2000ad Review is a brilliant resource, but its forum can be very quiet.

As far as I can see, the forum has been extremely helpful with its feedback for graphic novels and Rebellion have been intelligent enough to use that feedback. But at times, the company also needs telling when something is wrong (the most obvious thing I can think of recently is the St Patrick's Day t-shirts that weren't delivered on time).

I'm rambling now. But it's passionate rambling. I've been seeing a lot of unnecessary over-regulation destroying companies and industries recently (I work in the gambling sector) and I guess this brought parallels to mind for me.

"coffee"

"beer?"

c-o-f-f-e-e?

"b-e-e-r?"

"Part of what I don't understand is the problem with this board being on the 'official site'. Does anyone really think that the views expressed on it are representative of Rebellion?"

Well, if people vandalise outside your office, no-one assumes the the vadilism represents you - unless you don't do anything about it, in which case they may infer that you're not that interested in keeping the place clean.


"I don't think the argument that people will go elsewhere will work either."

There was a vibrant online community long before the official one kicked off - alt.comics.2000AD was a great resource, a brilliant place for fan and pro to mix (and, often, the place where many fans became pros) and it died a death when a few idiots made the place inhospitable to most reasonable people and the 2000AD official website started up where those individuals could be banned (and people have been banned here, so it's a bit odd to say there's no censorship in here - there is, it's just applied very, very sparingly)

I love the forum, I love the feedback (even when it's not all sunshine and roses) I just think the tone of conversation can maintain a certain amount of respect for everyone (and I don't mean everyone should be bowing before the mighty creators - rather the sort of respect you'd show to anyone you'd just been introduced to in a pub).

-pj

I don't want this place to go. After all where can I go to keep badgering for a canon fodder reprint if this place is gone?

I just feel its a little unfair for us who enjoy and love this place.

Yours

David "one 2000ad letter column at a time" Page

aka The monarch

 I have a bit of a problem in this area.I have a hyphenated surname ,the other half being De Maine.

 Thats the fault of my mum and dad obviously.


 I give up with it because its always "How do you spell that ? "

 "Its d-e- leave a gap - m-a-i-n-e"

 "No its M -a-i-n-e"

 "IS that all one word ?"

 "leave a gap but its not that important anyway-whatever"

  "Thats N-E.It has an E on the end."

  "Its a - I - n - e "

  Oh for fucks sake never mind.


 Bloody nightmare.

 

The vandalism metaphor is interesting, but then there is no clear definition of what is considered vandalism on this message board.

All we've had is "Tharg" throwing a wobbly and essentially stating that if some invisible line is crossed, the board will be shut down.

At least tell us where the line is.

It's like flat-sharing, and being too embaressed to tell your flat-mate that they smell like a bin on a hot summer's day because they don't wash their clothes, or that they need to help with the dishes.  If you leave it and leave it, and let it all stew inside of you then it'll probably come out like "aaaargh - you farking cnut - you stink and you never do anything and it drives me mental and you're lazy and I hate you and aaaaargh", before stabbing them to death with a rusty potato peeler.

Whereas, it's possible to approach these things in a more diplomatic (and yet still forceful) way.  

(Easy for me to say, I know.  I'm far away from perfect, especially when it comes to interpersonal diplomacy.)

"I sometimes wonder if it would be better if the reviews were held over until stories were finished."

Thaugh about this myself it might give a better all round acount of the story but we cant stop the weekely review, might encourage some to do a big reread of stories that they may have dismissed weeks previous.

yeah but acting like a dick twat is a great way of getting a reaction... negative strokes and all that

I find it sad that we only really hear from the nerve centre when its about fans being complainy arses, what about a pat on the head for all the good behavior, fun laughter, joy & happiness ?

Too true, Bou!
I don't think i've seen many creators coming on to thank people for glowing reviews- only to complain about bad ones.

Me too Bou, most of the time this board shows how vibrant and passionate 2000ADs fans are about our beloved prog. Look at the 'proud we are of all of them thread' Rebellion, do you really want to stop things like that?

The only outcomes of all this Ive seen so far are a bunch of lifelong fans being upset, and one person not reading your books anymore.

Uhm... please cite!

The only thing I can think of is the John Smith incident, and even he wasn't complaining about a bad review so much as complaining that the reviewer had already decided how the strip was going to end. (I don't agree with John's tone, but I can see what it was that upset him - though I didn't read the rest of the posts.)

For me - I don't respond to positive reviews cus I'm too British, and it feels, just a bit ... I dunno... American. Also? if I did, then I'd HAVE to respond to the negative. And I really don't see the point of responding to the negative.

(Being a thin skinned creator of course, when I read a positive review I'm thinking 'they don't know what they're talking about' and when I read a negative review I think 'he's right, I hate him' - joke!)

The only things I tend to respond to are either direct questions or to correct any assumptions (and even then, I'll try not to do that within review threads).

-pj

"The only outcomes of all this Ive seen so far are a bunch of lifelong fans being upset, and one person not reading your books anymore."

Well, I've seen a number of people put aside their online name to show their real names - which, as odd as it may seem, has made me warm to the group more.

I've also seen a number of well thought out, honest, heartfelt pleas for the forum to stay alive - which, I think, is much more representative of the group as a whole than the review/preview/any mills thread thread can be and maybe Rebellion and others need to see that to know that's how the majority of people feel.

Personally, I've also been able to get some stuff off my chest that's bothered me for some time - and, while I'm the lone creator voice in this thread (and I'm trying not to speak for all creators, since, like any group of people we are all individuals) - I know some others that feel the same way.

So, in sum: I think this thread has been particularly positive. I'm hoping some long term changes can come about that will make this forum a great place for fans and pros to mix, where the distinction between isn't them vs us - you know, like the hall of a decent British comic con.

-pj

"and, while I'm the lone creator voice in this thread "

I now await the infamous Holden/Spurrier bust up of 2008! ;)

like the hall of a decent British comic con.


But without the sticky heat and teenage manga fans in wierd costumes...

And I blame TrodelBack for it all- it kicked off on the day he was off getting married, so it must be his fault somehow.

*cough* oh yeah. HIM.

Also: rufus.

Sorry, got carried away there!

-pj

I'm not defending him, but even S****'s rubbish has sparked some fascinating debates in the past. Nobody ever agreed with Philt about anything really, he so isn't the norm on this board.

Well if it makes Tharg not hate me, a reader week in week out since 1981, I will stop swearing and change my username to my real name.

General Sir Benjamin Clark Phd

(I may have exaggerated my CV slightly)

I'd hate for this place to go. So many good things have come from it; thousands of pieces interesting (and non-interesting) stuff; on and off topic, hundreds of laughs...every week, umpteen small press comics, dozens of friendships, a few relationships and, for me personally, one engagement. I'd never have met Malchi if she hadn't signed up here, and now we're rapidly approaching our 5th anniversary together. :)

Obviously there are shitty bits to the board and there have been times when quite a few of us, including me, have gone off our heads and stepped over the line. Just like 'real life'.

The problem seems to be that the very few bad things overshadow the many good when some troll or mentallist makes their presence felt. It'd be a shame if the majority of us were made to suffer for the perpetual trollings of a few nob-ends.

"I now await the infamous Holden/Spurrier bust up of 2008!"

What, no love for Al?

Gah! He derailed the thread though! (Not intentionally, granted)

Interesting that the 'pros' that have contributed here are active on the board normally (and either started on the board as 'fans' or started at alt.comics.2000Ad as 'fans')

(Also: I'm beginning to hate the fan/pro distinction. I have a day job - yeah, sometimes I draw stuff in 2000AD, but I still pay my money for week for the prog every week does that mean I'm not allowed to be a fan???? /internal monologue)

- pj

Heh - a four way super bout!

If there was a way to make people not sometimes be angry about something they are passionate about, then you could probably make the board a less negative place - how you do that i dont know.  Theres nothing in recent posts that has broken the code of conduct, and without adding "be civil, even when livid" to the code and then finding a way to enforce it, i dont see the way forward.  As Funt says, its no good having invisible lines that anyone can cross and can trigger the utter destruction of the board for everyone, no matter how nice they've palayed over the years.

S'alright, PJ- we weren't counting you as a pro!
;D

I have a plan for some new content for the message board, which may help. Keep an eye out for it in a week or so.

Also, if anyone feels that someone is disrupting the board, or breaching the code of conduct, please email me and direct me to the relevant thread so I can decide whether I feel any action is needed.

Cheers,

Wake (aka Wakefield Carter)

I go back to my original post: I think use of real names encourages people to be more civil (and, you know, if you want a nickname too, no reason not to have that "PJ 'pj' Holden").

Enforcement of the 'not being a dick' rule is more difficult, but it's doable if there were a number of moderators who were more prepared to step in when they felt people were indulging in shenanigans.

-pj

Possibly - I wouldnt object to people being asked to think before they post, but I really wouldnt see either Philts or Jimbos comments kicking in a mod if we had them - Philt has a  harsh opinion, but is it an unreasonable one?  Theres swearing, but is that really the issue?  He's dismissive of the Dredd, so maybe you could call him on that, but otherwise, he sells his disappointments to me in his other reviews, even if i dont wholely agree with them.

I suppose the fear of the alternative would be something like Outpost Gallifrey, where any dissenting voice is likely to be shouted down by a small vocal group of happy clappers who can prove you are wrong - with bar charts! and even then, its a less positive atmosphere than the one we have here i'd argue.

I fit was doable without stifling passionate but negative opinion, then I'd be all for it... I just think it'd be a good group of mods who could keep both sides of the equation happy.

Maybe call it the 'not being a prat' rule or something. Then John Smith can still use his favourite word ;)

Then John Smith can still use his favourite word ;)


What, 'Shatterlight'?

What we really need is a good troll incursion...

Ok I give up. How the shuddering arse do we change our identities?

x

Click on "My Details" at the top.

One of us... One of us...

Gorrit!
I think I'm coming down with acute skitz-o-freenia! Frankly that's the best you lot are getting out of me on a public messgae board until it becomes compulsory x

Wimp.

A healthy dose of paranoia never hurt anyone! x

I'd be sad to lose the UKD. I created it for this site, and now use it all over the web, in loads of other forums, and on Ebay. Simply because it means that 2000ad fans will recognise it as me.
My Mii is called ukdane (whilst everyone else in our household is called be their real name).
Even my log in to my computer is ukdane (now you know!)

Maybe I should try and change my real name to ukdane, it'd be easier :-)

We might all appear in someones thesis one day decades from now,about internet personas and privacy and the birth of the truly online world, alongside a chapter about that Harry Potter fanfic mentalist with the 15 sock puppets.

Call it 'The Day Tharg Turned on his Squaxx'

:: Call it 'The Day Tharg Turned on his Squaxx'

Tharg always turns me on.

M@

I know this seems a little pathetic, but I'm pleasantly surprised at the number of real names that have shown up - and I keep wanting to say 'oh hello, Ben' (or whoever).

- pj

Me too! but he isn't looking that sexy today.

Hello!
I assumed that everyone kind of knew who was who in real life, and it's always great to meet boarders. I met Proudhuff, Tiplodocus and Dog Deever at Hi-Ex, theyre all top lads but I think of their board names first, before their real names. This is going to take some getting used to kids!

I assume that most people know who I am too.

I do, but I also like the fact that you like being ukdane. I used to like being satchmo.

I'm wondering if anyone will bother joining this forum now if they lurk a bit and see new users getting 'use your real name' before they get 'hello'.

My name is Samuel Wilkinson, and I'm a Squaxx!

It's good to meet you all - I've seen several names floating around in the world of fandom, but I've not always been able to connect them to usernames (or, indeed, icons).

best of both worlds as it were

"Call it 'The Day Tharg Turned on his Squaxx'"

I read that as The Day Tharg turned on Sussex.
Where the Mighty Green one came down on the South Coast county with Rigellian Hotshots to destroy the secret enclav of ThrillSuckers.
Huge battles, children screaming in the streets as issues of Spectacular Spider-Man were immolated on the shelves.  Women wondering what all the fuss was about and a small group of man-children scavanged the thrills scattered on the streets to hoard away for an evening's entertainment.

Or something.

I'm not sure I'm liking this real names thing.

Yeah, it's nice knowing who people really are, but some of the character of the messageboard seems to be draining away in the process.

I'm starting to miss the silly sounding pseudonyms already.

Malcolm (Ichabod) Kirk

That's not my real middle name, incidentally.

Malcolm (Isembard) Kirk.

In fact one of the highlights of Hi-Ex was a drunken conversation with aforementioned lads about why we picked our usernames!

Heh, and the worst thing about using your real name, is that you didn't even get to choose it yourself :-)

But the thing with real names is that you have to be willing to stand behind your comments.
I'm still trying to get a Future Shock past Tharg, so by using my real name it's going to force me to not act like a tool on the official board.

It will not however encourage me to spell or grammar check my postings!

>> But the thing with real names is that you have to be willing to stand behind your comments.

Yet, as mentioned upthread, it's easy enough to still use an assumed name.

Which is why I said all that thesis cobblers above. Because I kind of liked having an internet persona, maybe I've said some harsh things in the past in the heat of the moment, but on the whole I think I was fairly reasoned in most of my comments. It had never really occurred to me that anonymity+internet= total p**** or whatever that comic strip says.
I'm ambivalent about this, I really don't mind people knowing who I am, I'm friends with loads of you on facebook anyway. But I also agree with Malcolm Icarus Kirk about the character of the board.

Ben, who already feels like a miserable old b****** now he can't hide behind his wallscrawling juve persona :)

Well yeah, but if you're prepared to change your nick name for an assumed name it maybe doesn't bode well for your intentions on the site. Unless your name is so scorned and hated that you don't want anyone to prejudge you.

- pj

Regarding the given example of the return of Defoe, I think [censored].

You mean this strip? :)

- pj

The other issue regarding avoiding the use of real names on a public forum is one of privacy, though: not one of ill intent.  There seems to be an assumption otherwise.

Thats the one!

This whole "real names" thing might be slightly derailed by the fact that Philt, aka Phil(ip) (T)opping, was in fact using his real name.

Unless your name is weird or unusual that shouldn't be a problem, Linto.... oh.

- pj

Well, Philt might have caught the brunt of the Rigillion hotshot, but I'm pretty sure that it wasn't aimed squarely at either him or that single post.

- pj

Also, the only guy whose real name is 'T' is Mr. T.

Oh, and Ice T.

and Mousse T.

I was going to make a "Dr T and the Women" joke, but remembered that nobody watched it.

...and Miss T, the cartoon witch from the Misty comic.

Hmm... real names is a nice idea in theory, but this board already seems a lot less fun as the goofy aliases dwindle.

It's also supremely ironic. C'mon, this is a board about a comic whose creators pretend to be a big green alien and a bunch of robots!!

Link: Work it, Mousse T

'Pretend'?

I really don't see the point in using real names. There's a lot of times when I'm about to post something yet hold off and most of the time don't bother, yet get me down the pub with a few pints and I'll tell you exactly what I think. If anything I'm more civil on here than I am face to face.

If people really object to someone's post then surely reporting them to Wake or giving them an email (like the one or two I've been sent) is enough?

I fear change.

Point taken about criticisms. I don't usually comment on the prog but have done so now and again (especially when I said Blood of Satanus 3 made me want to rip my eyes out!)

I wouldn't want to lose the board as it's one of the few places I can geek out a bit and as I've mentioned before in another topic, there's so much I've discovered from this board.

So, real name from me as well, and before it starts; No, I am not the photographer/artist from Cumbria. Yes, it was me that did all those stupid Sims in the early 2000's

What Sims, Mr Goldsworthy?

I'm not the photographer version of Malcolm Kirk neither.

Malcolm (Indiana) Kirk.

And I'm not Ben Clark the football player, Ben Clarke the rugby player, Ben Clark the character from Neil Simon's The Sunshine Boys, or Ben Clark the hard boiled private eye from 1940s american radio. Though I wish I was :)

And I'm almost certain PVS didn't write The Jewel In The Crown :)

These type of Sims. The EA/Maxis ones.



I knew one day this would all come back and bite me on the arse!

Crikey, this thread grows too fast for me to keep up with.

I've not really got an opinion on the event that caused all the stomm flying around, but I definately agree that this board is a major part of my reasons for still reading 2000 and I'd be sad to see it go.

Of course it is going nowhere really, this is all a storm in a teacup..

Dave Evans- Bolt-01

Having just done a search on my name to make sure I wasnt aligning myself with someone even crazier than me, I can safely say I am not the same Leigh Shepherd who makes wedding jewellrey, nor the same one who puts up poetry on DeviantArt.

I am the one who  had his article on 2000AD computer games ripped off by Rebellion though - I'd forgetten all about that - thanks, never forgetting, never forgiving web!

And I'm not the Linton Porteous that...oh, wait - in all probability I am, whatever it was.

As far as I know, my full name is completely unique. Which is precisely why I won't be using it here, or anywhere without some kind of secure log-in.

I take one hour off from the office and there are two more whole pages to read - when was the last time we got this excited about anything? Apart from the underwear thread, obviously. :)
Lx

>I think use of real names encourages people to be more civil

real name 8-?

There's an underwear thread? Blimey, if I'd known that I wouldn't have bothered with this one...

- pj

I think the whole "don't say anything you wouldn't say to their face" policy is a sensible one, in that it should at least prompt people to be a little more articulate with exactly what their criticism is.

I've never been shy about saying when I dislike something, and mentioned in the prog thread that in the one instance that I was pretty harsh I had reason to feel pretty bad about it afterwards. That's not to say that I don't want to have the freedom to discuss the pros and cons of certain strips, but I'd like to think I'm a bit more constructive these days. Coincidentally, as I said in the prog thread, I thought the issue in question was brilliant, and I thought every story included was hugely enjoyable.

I do seem to have missed John Smith's comments though, so might be missing the big picture. What thread was that in?

Oh, and also, in the spirit of change I have tried to change my name but I think the work PC's proxy stuff is causing me problems with it, but will do so later.

And in keeping with the new attitude might I add PJ that it's been a joy to watch your art develop and grow over your last few strips, with the last 86ers strip and Dead Signal being utterly lovely.

It's nice to be nice.

Cheers - it's also ok to say I suck. Though, we all know that's not true. I AM great.

- pj

Okay. This is woth a try....*

Because people are not as articulate as others does not mean they should not have a point of view.

From that I think Matt has shown great respect to Phil by acknowledging his points are heard and they are affecting. I escalate like someone who should be shunned from society a lot recently. But for 5 years between 2000 and 2005 I had my head on straight. X didn't mean up and Y did not mean down any more. The panic was lost and reason flooded my nervous system.

Empathy seems lost a lot in internet commenting and maybe thats due to the lack of human contact with the person you're commenting on. Impulsive posting should be good hearted and pleasantly orchestrated but in truth this hardly ever happens because of the massive uncertainty of being unheard.

Our demographic have been brought up where people can't afford a toffee for everything we did that was good because theres is a lot of good stuff being done. Its our duty to proclaim that this is the Galaxies greatest. Also to expect an earbashing   when we shit on our own doorstep. Because, setting you straight when you go wrong because they care for you costs nothing. You're also looking after your future interests. Its pretty reasonable.

It just takes some of us longer to soak that in and before its all ironed out and organised in yourself the next three or four impulses have had  a stommload to say.

I think boarders like me have to remember; This is not our office, we don't have to react straight away or files go one way and hell will break loose.

It is not a marriage where if you have to think about it the other person doesn't feel you really do love them.

Its a medium we have expressive interests and tendernesses for.

As for real names, I say this;

Strip away the personality and all you have is another animal.

That's great with sex although it isn't that good with love. And you should never confuse the two.

Anyway I wanted my passionate plea and there it is.

PS; There are a lot of fundamental flaws in the message board which have to be worked with if we do indeed want this to be a good place to come talk. As much as the previews are predictive to the message outcome it never looks like how you planned the rant/comment to be in the first place.

I count three states of change in a post.

The initial box.
The preview.
The final post.

We like the eccentricity of the board but are frustrated by its lowfi?

Or can we  consider it when posting?

 Just an afterthought. (*See top)

Is this not deflecting away the fact that the last issue was a bit rubbish.  Sure the criticism could have been articulated a little better, and the response shouldn't have been a threat to take down the board or such, that's playground chest puffing.   Why not take the reviews as a form of feedback and do something about it?  Similarly, why not address the issue of bad issues in a more constructive manner (although Bollox is a fair point, crude but expressive)? The simple fact is to put out a good issue and the creators can bask in the glowing praise that comes with it!  
Jon

Or maybe instead of posting negative remarks about the issue, don't buy it!  I'm sure that would send a larger message than swearing and complaining and keep all posters happy.  
Jon

How would you know if it was rubbish or not if you didn't buy it?

How would you know if it was rubbish or not if you didn't buy it?

I would call that the Doctor Who Conundrum, in honor of the boarders who watch Doctor Who week after week to make sure they still don't like it.

I disagree that the recent prog was "bollox", though. It might not be thrilling socks off entirely, but it's hardly a bad run of stories.  Comparatively, it's not as good as the first part of the year - but then that was ridiculously good, so it's no surprise that whatever came afterwards couldn't live up to it.

There's actually nothing bad in the prog at the moment, for my money: it's all just different degrees of good.  My least favourite strip recently has been Dead Signal, but note that I said "least favourite".  The garish colours and the open ending weren't my cup of tea, but at the same time it was attempting something quite different by leaving question marks, and by drastically altering the art style between the two  given realities.  Simply for not being predictable, it should be praised.  And if that's the worst that's on offer (for me), then I'm a lucky squaxx.

Really, I'm not looking forward to Defoe, because I didn't enjoy the script in the last one, much.  I thought that carrying out philosophical name-dropping discussions in the middle of a heated battle just didn't work well for my suspension of disbelief.  The art was amazing, though: and the art wouldn't be there without the same imagination that made the choices about having those discussions in the middle of the battle scenes.

And so on...

"Is this not deflecting away the fact that the last issue was a bit rubbish."

Well, first - that's your opinion*, and, of course, you're welcome to it - but no, the tension, I'm pretty sure has been building and, granted it was probably less likely to explode in the middle of thread of universal praise - but to dismiss it as being the result of a single issue is a wrong.

- pj
*Very few progs ever get universal praise or universal condemnation - and there are contrary opnions of the prog here there and everywhere.

One question though, and it's relevant to the whole 'them and us' thing that seems to be developing-
On-board critics are to reveal identities, but droids who go complaining to Tharg? We'll never be told which ones did and they won't have to put their names behind their groans. It could create more of divide than anything else.

This whole 'corporate board' thingy is a nonsense as well- how does that impact on the more political stuff that's been in tooth over the years. Its hypocracy plain and simple.
2000ad, the rebellious, anti authoritarian comic. Getting heavy with it's staunchest fans because it doesn't like their opinions. I'll think about that the next time I read about Dredd being a fascist bully boy cop.

If we all pissed off to the review site and left this place to the cyberdust and tumbleweed, I doubt that a dead forum would look too good for 2000ad.

"On-board critics are to reveal identities, but droids who go complaining to Tharg?"

There are two issues you're conflating here:

1) On the board I think it's reasonable to ask people to use real names (including any droids that post here - although, afaik, the mostly do already) - it should be noted, droids are rarely anonymous in print.

2) Do we want to name and shame those people that complained to tharg? Personally, I say no - let's take the complaints on the chin and move on, otherwise you're in danger of starting a witch hunt. (And besides, it's less likely to be a specific instance of a specific person and more likely to be a general, on going, ill feeling that many creators feel that the board is an inhospitable place for them).

"This whole 'corporate board' thingy is a nonsense as well- how does that impact on the more political stuff that's been in tooth over the years. Its hypocracy plain and simple. "

If 2000AD prints something that's political and someone doesn't agree with it the company either has to stand beside it or not - the website inhabits a weird zone where if someone says something against (for example) McDonalds and McDonalds comes in and demands recompense - what happens there? do rebellion stand by some poster they don't know?

"Getting heavy with it's staunchest fans because it doesn't like their opinions. "

It's not that they don't like the opinions, so much as they way those opinions are often expressed in a negative way.

"If we all pissed off to the review site and left this place to the cyberdust and tumbleweed, I doubt that a dead forum would look too good for 2000ad."

And if the message board pissed off all the creators who decided they'd had enough of the working for 2000AD it wouldn't look great for 2000AD either.*

-pj
*Not that either of those scenarios are likely to happen - there are other forums.

Dammit, PJ, stop trying to be so sodding reasonable! I bet you like torturing Gronks, on the sly . . .

As Matt said and PJ has repeatedly pointed out - it is NOT criticism that is the problem here, but the manner in which it is delivered. No-one is censoring opinions or suggesting opinions should be censored or that people should not express an opinion or that some opinions are more valid than others. At no time did Matt say that he wants to silence those who disagree with him or the opiions of creators. That DIDN'T happen.

He raised a legitimate concern about the WAY those opinions have been expressed and THAT is the issue here. Let's keep it on the actual issue, rather than imagined ones.

How can you put a less negative slant on something you don't like?

Dead simple - you simply EXPLAIN your opinions, negative or positive, rather than just shouting the first thing to come into your head.

Like you just did? Read my post again...

Don't follow you...

hmm, i like the silliness of using a stupid made up name on a forum which is not about work or being sensible, having a stupid name gives me more freedom ( sort of ) to piss about, have fun & be 'me'.

 My real name is almost my business 'brand' if you like, i don't want someone googling for their favorite highland arty crafty community art worker wotsit & finding that instead of earnestly painting tartan sheep or whatever i'm supposed to be doing, i'm ranting on about the colour of a space robots shoes or something dumb.

COMICS = FUN   or for me at least.

...tsk... oh okay then.. Victoria Jane Stonebridge , ya bastards.

Link: My web sites a fecking shambols !

Well- I said "how do you put a less negative slant on something you don't like?"
You said
"...EXPLAIN your opinions, negative or positive..."

If your opinions are negative then how can explaining negative opinion be less negative?

Surely thats a pretty reasonable assumption?

Tough for me, cus I don't usually just spurt out my my opinion, but when I'm asked to criticise someones art (which, I grant, is a different situation) I look it over, weigh it up, consider it and then figure out how they could improve it. Sometimes there's nothing that can be done, or it's just not something I think 2000AD would use, in which case I suggest they try some of the other publishers.

I look at the thing, figure out how I would improve it (if I could), and make that suggestion.

But, again, this isn't about just reviews (negative or otherwise) - it's about the general level of discourse - look at the art threads*, and how this place can be at its best and compare it to the Pat Mills threads.


-pj
*Although, there's one in particular that irks me a little - that little Tharg one is great drawing - but seems to take aim at Art for no particular reason (maybe I've missed some great big flamewar) and then there's a little throwaway gag about the 86ers sitting in Tharg's bin - haha - hey, that's two years of my life. In a bin. Hilarious.  It's that kind of dismissive nonsense that makes many creators feel they're being killed by a thousand paper cuts. Not me though - slash away, I'm all man.

If your opinions are negative then how can explaining negative opinion be less negative?

I think longmans point was not that your comment be less negative, but that it is made up of reasoning.

ie - That was wank.  X sucks because all his stuff does exactly the same thing.
Is negative.

I don't like this story at all, doesn't grab me, the characters are dull, boring and hard to tell apart.  The story seems like a long winded excuse to rant about the dangers of sugar sniffing - and the writer's is making the same points he did in "Sniffers" last year, but now with more added violence and random profanity.
Is still negative, but with an explanation.

It just means you need to put more thought into your posts on this board.

My real name is almost my business 'brand' if you like, i don't want someone googling for their favorite highland arty crafty community art worker wotsit & finding that instead of earnestly painting tartan sheep or whatever i'm supposed to be doing, i'm ranting on about the colour of a space robots shoes or something dumb.

I'm kinda in this category. I'm a serious business journalist (pft). Being able to be identified as the sad loser that spends too much time on a comics website would not be a good career move.

totally see where you're coming from, PJ- I do art tuition for twee wee watercolourists and assorted folks at the bottom of lifes pile, and I feel on safer ground when I don't like artwork- I can formulate an opinion and express it with reference to the why. But I'm not in any way a writer, I don't feel able to talk about the finer points of characterisation, plot holes, continuity, dramatic wotsits etc. If I don't like a story it's either boring, cheesy or a bit crap- I don't know how to make it better. If I did, I would be a professional comics writer. Does that mean I have to shut up because I can't join the high brow debate? Is my opinion any less valid?

I understand his post- but that wasn't my question- which he was answering.

I'm not just being an arse*- it's a serious question.



*opinion, not fact.

I think if you just imagine that the people you're criticising are sitting beside you, exactly what would you say? Would it change what you'd say or, at least, make you rethink saying it?

You know, 'I didn't enjoy this' is a easier to take than 'That was unmitigated shite'* (although I can appreciate that many people are probably using this as a forum to release a hard days work - and may find it difficult to just hold back the strong feelings for stuff that, ordinarily, they don't feel that strongly about)

-pj
*Not a calling for the abolishment of swear words - it just happened to be the easiest way for me to express this point.

I think the real issue is simply the amount of people who have criticised, far more than anything that's particularly been said. We're not to abuse the creators, but no-one did. Those who say 'thats shit' are being told to qualify their statements, those who say, "I hate this because blah blah" are being told to be less negative.
It's nonsense. The goalposts are moving continually. And, like it or not, it smacks more and more of bullying tactics by the company. I never thought I'd see that day round here. I guess I've said enough- you haven't persuaded me, we'll have to agree to differ. I'm not peeved or anything- I just disagree with the way things are going. That's too bad. I'll shut up now.

:D

If 2000AD prints something that's political and someone doesn't agree with it the company either has to stand beside it or not - the website inhabits a weird zone where if someone says something against (for example) McDonalds and McDonalds comes in and demands recompense - what happens there? do rebellion stand by some poster they don't know?

This brings in libel laws and if anyone posted anything libellous then Rebellion might be liable. They'd also have to pass over the real world details of the person who wrote the libel, who would also be liable. But that's not really the issue here. The only massively sensitive thing I've seen on here in the past year is a post mentioning a certain litigious Chelsea player and his habits.

As for anything not libellous - respond or suck it up.

"I think if you just imagine that the people you're criticising are sitting beside you, exactly what would you say? Would it change what you'd say or, at least, make you rethink saying it?"

I dunno - that does seems a laudable stance to take, but really, you are going to get dishonest reviews that way. We've seen examples where creators have turned uip to defend their work, and basically, bad opinion tends to curl up and die in the face of being "caught out". Arguably that is good if people are being twats about the whole thing, but if they are just proffering an honest but honest negative opinion?  You just end up with the negative things going unsaid, and the positives encouraged.  It's human nature to want to say nice things to people faces, even if your actual opinion is someway from 'nice'.  Its not the best way to review anything, even if it is the best way to make friends and influence people and have a 'happy' board.

Which if you are going to call "corporate board", then fair enough, but it will stifle negatvie feedback.  Do reviewers in any sphere try and sit there and think of the peoples feelings, or do they review "honestly and unmercifully" (anyone get the quote?)?  

For example, I wouldnt be honest about my bosses in front of their face - if I was down the pub and they were there, well, thats half the conversation killed at a stroke! That's an extreme example, but even so, if you go with "negatives must explain themselves" you are just gonna cut the negatives (that you can see anyway).  If Pat Mills was a regular, would he get the regular bouts of bashing he gets? Certainly not. Now in some ways that is appealing, cos I think the sniping we see  around Pat is a good example of what should be unacceptable, and I'd like to see it kerbed. But PhilTs comments - they seem a whole different kettle of fish to me.


And all this is not to argue people should be allowed to be rude, but going back to comments like Dark Jimbos and PhiltTs... they are harsh, but they how much more did PhilT need to explain himself?  He could have watered down his opinion somewhat possibly (possibly not) to make it more palatable, but it wouldnt have been an honest opinion. Or else it would have been a longer rant of the same level of negativity, but better expressed and harder to argue down!  

The other point I'd argue is a culture of 'speaking your mind' has been fostered on this board by creators and staff of Rebellion as much as any fans.

All thats not to say I wouldnt personally like people to dissect more accurately (both good and bad) their opinion.  I just see it being a hopeless task to draw the kind of lines Rebellion seem to want without a lot more fuss than we have already.  

That  said, the "simmering" board makes me think I still dont know what Rebellion are het up by - I just dont see it. The only place people can be expressing malcontent is the review threads yeah?  And if they are simmering with discontent, isnt that the progs fault as much as the fans, as the prog threads are just as likely to simmer with thrills when Thargs on a roll.

I dont see any threads calling for Thargs head on a plate for instance.  I really would like someone from Rebellion to clarify their grumbles - maybe thats whats needed to make some kind of sense of it and clear the air (that i  and many others thought was pretty clear anyway)?

'I didn't enjoy this' is a easier to take than 'That was unmitigated shite'

Blame Simon Cowell.

Although, there's one in particular that irks me a little ... that seems to take aim at Art for no particular reason ... and then there's a little throwaway gag about the 86ers sitting in Tharg's bin ... two years of my life. In a bin. Hilarious. It's that kind of dismissive nonsense that makes many creators feel they're being killed by a thousand paper cuts. Not me though - slash away, I'm all man.

You lie - I can smell your tears!
They're just references to the messageboard and nothing more.  Art happened to be in the screenshot I took of the messageboard, as was Funt Solo, who I, er... edited into the fictional Duane J sock puppet.  I probably should have thought a little further along those lines and edited out Art, too, as it would have saved at least one misunderstanding that's happened since.
As for 86ers, I was reading the Gordon Rennie career change thread at the time and it seemed like a throwaway reference that wouldn't offend - apparantly I was in err, and I apologise for that as it made you feel bad, which certainly wasn't the intention.

Now - when you say "that's two years of my life. In a bin.", does that mean there won't be any more 86ers?

No worries. It's not exactly as if I haven't told people to STFU if I've felt like they needed it.

(speaking purely as a messageboard user there)

Regarding the forum/reviews etc... I think a general rule of thumb might be to same to yourself  "Hmm, the people who made this are most likely reading this, am I being a dick?". If you are being a dick it might be an idea not to post it. If you can't tell if you're being a dick then you might want to er on the side of caution.

(if you feel you have a right to be a dick at all times and are damn well going to damn well be a dick, and be twice as much of a dick if anyone calls you on it then, er... you might just be a total dick. )

I can't really claim a particularly good record on this for myself, TBH (WYATT ORSE and all that), though I'm probably a lot more careful since I;ve known a few more droids and  seen the other side of things a little (though when it comes to my own stuff I think the boards been pretty gentle with me).

(I'm not, TBH, sure that real names vs. pseudonyms would change much of anything here though)

Can't they just get someone else to write 86ers? I was liking that!

Gordon himself said: 'Of the two ongoing 2000AD series I was writing, one of them already has a new writer, and I intend to hopefully still carry on with/tie up the other one myself.'

Which I took to mean 86ers and Cabals, respectively.

Oh! That's good.'Anyone' know if Dom and PJ are still onboard?


AHEM...

Dog- I believe Gordon said that of his two on-going series'; one was already with a new writer. Personally I hope that is the '86'ers, as I was enjoying that more than Cabs (Which I think has pretty much run it's course)

Bolt-01

Bah! This thread takes too long to read...

Bolt-01

I thought that Cabs was pretty much over too, but really Ravne and Jen are loose ends, whats left to tell may only be a few episodes, a mini-series,like has happened with the strip previously, but I was kind of looking forward to seeing what he was going to do with it. Obviously if Chapter and Verse get dragged out, it will leave a bad taste, but I think there's a little to go yet before it's done and dusted.

I'm glad someone else has been following 86ers- I was starting to think I was the only one!

How would you know if it was rubbish or not if you didn't buy it?

Surely not everyone buys each issue on blind faith?  I have a quick flick through in the comic shop or WH Smiths and if it seems to be good I buy it.  You wouldn't buy a house or a car without a peak first, or even go see a film without reading a review; why should a comic be any different?  If less people buy the issue when it is rubbish, or more people pick it up when a paricular issue is good, it speaks volumes louder than anyone proclaiming it's bollox on a message board and getting reprimanded for it.  Would artists/ writers then go and complain that people are not liking their product??  I don't think so, they would more than likely work harder to keep themselves in employment.  That is part of everyday working life that me, and I am guessing most others, have to put up with in order to be able to afford the comics, graphic novels and whatever other product, good or bad, Rebellion want us to buy.
Jon
p.s. and Bad 'I'm a serious business journalist' Andy, I don't think publishing 'Trainspotters weekly' qualifies???  hehe...

I liked 86ers, too, but thought it could benefit with a sustained presence in the comic, rather than intermittent 'books' or arcs, as I think the 'space war/disparate cast' is a shoo-in for a sci-fi anthology's audience.  Certainly more so than the once-omnipresent Sinister Dexter.

"And, like it or not, it smacks more and more of bullying tactics by the company."

What? one post from Matt? Since he's the only official voice of 2000AD that's said anything, I think you're reading quiet a lot into it.

-pj

"Now - when you say "that's two years of my life. In a bin.", does that mean there won't be any more 86ers?"

No, it means that the drawing of the 86ers book to you represents the 86ers but to me represents two years of my life. And it was in a bin. Nothing more complex than that.

-pj

"I dunno - that does seems a laudable stance to take, but really, you are going to get dishonest reviews that way. We've seen examples where creators have turned uip to defend their work, and basically, bad opinion tends to curl up and die in the face of being "caught out". Arguably that is good if people are being twats about the whole thing, but if they are just proffering an honest but honest negative opinion? You just end up with the negative things going unsaid, and the positives encouraged. It's human nature to want to say nice things to people faces, even if your actual opinion is someway from 'nice'. Its not the best way to review anything, even if it is the best way to make friends and influence people and have a 'happy' board. "

Good points, but the opposite is also true: where people feel they have free reign to say what they like they'll often say stuff that's overly negative/harpy or just bitchy because they can - it's far easier to vent the pressures of a day at the perceived quality of a comic strip in 2000AD.

re: specific comments - I don't think it'll serve any purpose going back over specifics, but I did reread Matt's original post - some six thousand posts ago, now, and it still seems reasonable:

"If you can't be constructive, or at least polite, in your criticisms then go off to some other corner of the internet and be needlessly rude and confrontational."

Nothing in that says you can't say you don't like the prog, Or specific work within it.


- pj

One of the things I really like about this board is that, on the whole, people don't seem to get away with just randomly slagging something off.  It's not that the boarders here won't unsheathe their claws and tear into a story, but most of the criticism I've seen around these parts has been explained, backed up and justified to some degree; you're less likely to see "this was crap" than "I thought this was crap because..." followed by a detailed dissection of plot, pacing, dialogue or whatever's deemed to be at fault.  I'd go so far as to say it's been educational, as I certainly wasn't as analytical about such things before I frequented the board.

Granted, I could just be reading these threads through a rose-tinted monitor and skipping anyone who doesn't present their slagging-off in a suitably polite and eloquent manner, but in the end it's the witty, intelligent and reasoned discussion that's shaped my opinion of the board in the sweet-Odin-that's-a-lot-of years since I joined.      

holley shit thats a big one...

Well to start I'd just like to say my name is Sean Becton and I'm a board-aholic, should this board be removed my whole work schedual will go up in smoke its really the only place I like to Skive time.  I've been visiting this site for about 5 years or so under several different names bu7t have no problem using my real name I just like Radbacker as it discribes where I'm from (and looks like it matched my little box so i thought i was quite clever at that)
 
I like the mix of positive and negative reviews as it give me several different opinions some I agree with some I dont, while I dont reveiw myself (as there is a time dialation of about 8 weeks between you guys getting your prog and me getting mine) i do enjoy seeing what other people think.  That said it can be quite nasty sometimes and as mentioned by everybody on this thread a bit of reasoned thinking before you post might be in order.  
One thing the droids need to remember is that I realy dont think any of us are proffesional reviewers, we're just a bunch of zealot FANS and everybody knows what fans are like (nasty buggers sometimes).

Please rebellion dont shut this board down I love it and I've got no problem with a few new rules and boundaries.  You want to see train wrecks try joining in on any thread on Aint it Cool news, that way lies madness.

CU Sean "Radbacker" Becton

Oh and P.S to Tharg
Something you could pull from here that would look good would be the Art thread, so much talent on show and it would be great to see the winner etc shown on the letters page as readers art like the old day.

CU Sean

I think people would like to feel more appreciated/acknowledged if the effort they put in daily was published in some form, even as a small side peace next to the litters.


Gavin Leahy  

Let's not forget the sunny place you could have...

Link: if the professionals still visited...

"though when it comes to my own stuff I think the boards been pretty gentle with me"

Pfff- you've just been lucky enough to get paired with really good artists that managed to elevate your otherwise rubbish stories...

;)

Don't worry, that won't last.

- pj

Tsk!  I thought you were leaving this thread forever?

:D

"If you can't be constructive, or at least polite, in your criticisms then go off to some other corner of the internet and be needlessly rude and confrontational."

Nothing in that says you can't say you don't like the prog, Or specific work within it.


I read it as saying exactly that: it explicitly says "If you can't be constructive", which I think means "you can't say you don't like the prog" (without offering further explanation).  That's where it becomes subjective, unfortunately.

Also, really, you've only chosen the nice part of his post, where he's being quite reasonable.  The next paragraph is where he tells us that there are other message board crimes being taken into account (so we're being watched and judged guilty without any kind of dialogue) and that if an invisible line is crossed that the message board will be closed.

I know you're trying to be positive about this, but at least take into account all of what was said by Tharg when you choose to describe it as "reasonable".

.....must......resist.....

While discussing this with somebody else, it occurred to me that a bit more interaction from Tharg might make for a little more positivity and generally better behaviour from all.

I'm not talking about Tharg joining in on threads like 'what socks do you wear'- but I'm gathering that a few people are openly irritated not just because Tharg has told them off, but because that it's the only input that he's had in a long time.

Obviously, I know the guy is busy putting together the Galaxy's Greatest Comic- but would it hurt to contribute a post here and there?  Surely something must pique his interest sometimes?

Just out of interest, does anyone know what sort of traffic this place gets- outside of the hundred or so reasonably regular posters?  Do we get many lurkers?

"it occurred to me that a bit more interaction from Tharg might make for a little more positivity and generally better behaviour from all."

It would be good to see Matt post, even if it's very occasionally. I think it's pretty clear that the interaction Jon has had with the board has been very positive. It has amended certain aspects of the books, and he's also been able to "justify" a couple of slightly leftfield decisions (such as Stone Island), rather than leaving the reasoning to speculation.

Various definitions of constructive criticism

Constructive criticism certainly DOESN'T mean saying everything is wonderful, in the same way that criticism doesn't mean saying everything is awful.

As regards the rest, well, I think there's a danger of the conversations spiralling downwards into bitterness and recriminations and I think if we can move forwards with a little bit of humour and hope* then the place would never be in any danger of anything.

-pj
*all together now 'PJ is a wanker' :)

The trouble is in the past we've been spoilt by the input of many Nerve Centre Droids but since those Days Jamie moved on who was forever on the board and his replacement Jon Oliver not only is responsible for an ncreased Graphic Novel line but also the Abaddon Books. There are no longer two editors as Cyber-Matt does both Jobs and with the increased work load due to the move tc I'm amazed we have seen more disruption to the schedule let alone anyone popping up for a chat.

Now if there's a job going that is well paid and means you sit on your arse all day answering the questions on the message board how do you apply 8-)

 I dont believe for a second that this messageboard is going to be pulled for transgressing an invisible *unknown* line of *whatever* it is as it would be very damaging to those that use it,those that read but dont post  ,and more than anything the comic itself.


 A very very bad move that would be indeed .


 I dont think that Rebellion want a forum full of fawning sycophants or to use an underlying threat of pulling the board if readers express opinions [positive or negative] as thats what its all about.

 I think Matt/Tharg was being reasonable if i understood the post correctly by that i maen Matt/Tharg is not saying dont be negative or critical about the content of the prog just do it with a bit of respect.

 Not "I think its shit ".

 No one likes that .

 Truly

 Either in print or to their face in the pub or whatever.I wouldnt like it and you wouldnt either if you are being honest with yourself and whats more i would not do it to someone else even though i am not scared to tell anyone exactly what i think of them to their face or in print.

 Unless its justified of course which it never is as nothing is ever that bad.


 It seems a fairly small thing to ask of us in return for having this place and i am willing to compromise[not that i ever posted disrespectful reviews] .Its such a small thing when everyone more or less has a free rein when posting [apart from the code of conduct] or starting topics.



 As for the rest of the implications of the post that started all this i really dont know as 10 pages later Matt or Tharg has not added anything else to the debate since to clarify exactly what they meant by pulling the board but it seems to lead back to Creators grievences about posted comments as quite honestly i cant see what else there is to complain about.

 It has already been confirmed that swearing is ok  to a certain extent even in a review if you care to say why.

"Surely not everyone buys each issue on blind faith?"

Well, I certainly do, and so does anyone who has a subscription. I buy Private Eye and Times Higher Education on the same basis. It's not unheard of.

"Now if there's a job going that is well paid and means you sit on your arse all day answering the questions on the message board how do you apply 8-)"

Which is actually nothing like what I suggested at all, is it?

cant....resist...

Philt was cited, by Tharg, as the offender for this. Philt did give constructive criticism of both Dead Eyes and 10 Seconders. He said they were 'incomprehensible'. Many agree. To improve the stories, they could have been made easier to follow. Fairly simple, really.

I don't think anyones hating you PJ- you're trying to be reasonable, as are we, but we don't believe that what Tharg is asking for is reasonable. Perhaps he can clear up what he is looking for. And why philt was the sacrificial lamb. Really, it could have been any of us. I thought one of my reviews of Dead Eyes in an earlier prog was a hell of a lot worse than his. Though it wasn't a personal sleight against any creator.

Well I guess, despite protestations to the contrary, Tharg is only human.  People in all walks of life absorb what they perceive to be slights all the time- then blow up at some seemingly inconsequential or innocuous comment that, to them, is simply the last straw.

Have you never blown your top, to the almost total bemusement of those around you?  You'll be shocked to learn that I have, I'm sure.

 

Fact is, the comic is made for us readers. This board offers a valuable place for us readers to relax, to skive, and to grasp a feeling - however tenuous - of community. Just as with any bunch of people, there is a sperad of views and they are offered in different ways.

On the one hand, Rebellion and the creators should appreciate that what you are dealing with here are the hardest of hard core fans - you have to be, to sign on and post on a message board. That is what the board caters to, and so it should - through thick and thin, we are the ones who read the comic. And, to be fair, I think Rebellion do their best to tolerate our foibles.

On the other hand, what we as the users of the board have to realise is that Rebellion is a company with product to sell. Even if it is to us. It has to tread a line between "freedom of speech" and standing back while its product - 2000ad - is bad-mouthed using tools it provides. Sometimes, the criticism can go too far here, especially unconstructive stuff.

At the risk of sounding arse-licky, Rebellion provide this forum and we should respect that. That is not to say we shouldn't criticise them or 2000ad, but rather that we should do so in a constructive manner.

The real issue here is one of standards. Many other forums, not provided by the supplier of the thing to which they relate, are full of vitriol and spite. At the risk of generalising, it seems to be a teenager thing, a symptom of a greater malaise in society. This board has for a long time had older members, but it seems to me that a greater number of members - especially new ones - are younger, and carry with them the attitudes found on other boards. That, in turn, alienates the longer standing posters who fade away, meaning that the more offensive posts become more prevalent.

It strikes me that to close the board is a knee-jerk reaction that will alienate Rebellion's customers. Yet, to keep it open as is would allow the problem to fester. My solution would be more aggressive policing.

Anyone who is abusive on a baseless level (ie saying "Pat Mills writes shit", rather than "Pat Mills can be a bit preachy, is this the right thing to have in a sci-fi comic?") should be warned and ultimately expelled. Maybe a two yellow, then red card procedure with the yellows lasting six months?

Ultimiately, and just to make you all feel bad, I think we should have some perspective, people. My oldest boy has been in hospital since Tuesday, and has just been allowed out today (for the day, and he's in bed).

It's nothing life threatening, just a rare-ish infection treated by IV antibiotics. However, it does put issues regarding the importance of this board and sensitive creators into a different light.

I mention this to show how I've used the board for the last five years - as a diversion, a place of fun, where I can exchange views with like-minded people. Let's keep it that way.

You are Robbie Morrisson and I claim my five pounds.

;)

Hope your lad is feeling better soon.

"Rebellion provide this forum and we should respect that"..

that nails it really.

Let's all just be reasonable and polite..

And now...back to the comics, I hope...

:-) Rufus... unfortunately my real name

Agreed, Matt, but for actions then to be carried forward based on someone acting/ posting in anger is just going to aggravate the situation.

Boarders now are being painted as nasty shites who fill this forum with bile directed personally at creators, or else brainless teenagers who baselessly criticise. NO-ONE AT ALL has argued a case for personally insulting creators- they would be rightly  witch-hunted with pitchforks and burning irons. So it's a moot point and shouldn't even be being discussed.

Some-one find an example of a review with unqualified criticism and link it here, or one with direct abuse at a creator.
We looves ya's all! That's why we're here. But it's starting to feel like you hate us.
In truth, most of us probably want things to go back the way they were before, and forget all of this has happened.

Whoa, your name is Derek?

I've just found direct abuse of more than one creator, but not in a review. It's in the 25th anniversary prog from a few years back. Tharg has them torn apart by Mek-Quake for writing rubbish stories.

No constructive criticism to be seen.

...and there's more slagging off a few pages later...

Quite. And I'm not sure exactly how it's any more acceptable to be equally dismissive of something as universally loathed, it seems, as Junker than it is of something that only a minority dislike.

MIK ... you're talking about a Different Editor...

Come on guys... This is petty

It may well have been a different editor but it was still done under the guise of Tharg with, I presume, Rebellion's consent.

It's not my intention to sound petty but, as with a fair few others here, Matt's response to philt's comments did seem somewhat out of the blue. That's not to say it was unjustified but it was hardly the most appropriate response.

It's a rare thing for me to read the Prog these days, less so buy it. Yet, if it hadn't been for all this nonsense, I doubt I would have bothered thumbing through it in Smith's soon after all this kicked off.

Timson's right: everyone loses it from time to time.  Tharg's words should be taken with a pinch of salt or five, and then Wake said there'd be something along to clear matters up a bit in a week or so, I think, earlier in this thread.

So, flames off, chill pills in: aaaaaand relax.  

I know it was a different editor and I wasn't having a go at him or anybody else, but that wasn't my point and the only reason I picked that story as an example, is because I could clearly remember it and it was easy to find.

I was just pointing out that 2000ad itself has, in the not too distant past, slagged off writers, artists, and more commonly, specific stories, in a very direct way without any real justification other than the work was unpopular.

If people are used to seeing that kind of thing said in the comic, they're obviously going to get a bit miffed when they're told they're not allowed to do the same.

>> Tharg's words should be taken with a pinch of salt or five, and then Wake said there'd be something along to clear matters up a bit . . .

Which is just dandy by me. And yeah, it's the continued justification by both sides here that seems to be fanning those flames . . .

That's 'Mr' Timson, to you...

I'm really intrigued by how involved this debate has become. People certainly feel strongly about the whole issue of criticism.

    We could spend the rest of our lives picking apart old posts, old editorials, old threads looking for who slagged off who more,etc... but what does this serve? This is not a Truth and reconciliation committee! ;-)

Get on with your day. Be polite, don't slag off anyone, and just enjoy your comic!

If you've got criticisms, fine, post away... even better, email the Letters Page.

Tharg wants your feedback.

:-) ruf

heh! Comedy gold!

;D

Perhaps we should use this charasmatic fellow's approach as a template for constructive criticism? (Joking!)

Link: Hitler on Torchwood series 2 finale

"MIK ... you're talking about a Different Editor..."

Fair enough, but what was 'constructive' or 'polite' about Rennies Fan Dredd strip in one of last Years Megazine?  

Most of the boarders 'named and shamed' took that in a spirit of good humour that I don't really think was intended by either writer or editorial...

Anyway, enough flame fanning (or fan flaming for that matter) - I await Wakes message of recopncilliation!

When it's decided what's happening, can someone summarise it in a shorter thread for me please.

And WoD stays...it's pretty much my name anyway.

Leigh... maybe read the second part of my previous post.

I'm not defending anyone...

:-) rufus

During my short stint at the Nerve Centre there was some talk of advertisers etc being put off by the Message Board.
My idea was to split the message board from the web site to give the Nerve Centre deniability to what topics are discussed.

 Why is Philt the sacrificial lamb as it were when he chose to leave himself ?


 Ok his comments were the straw that broke the camels back in regard to comments that have been posted but not exclusivly by any means.

 I got the impression that Matt/Tharg picked up on his comments as an example and he chose to take it personally rather than post an apology or whatever.

Sure Rufus, no ill will intended really, it just struck me kinda funny, and this thread reminded me of the previous controversy over the Rennie Dredd, which I'd forgotten about til this blew up.

We still dont know what talk it was that turned off the advertisers - was it lewdness?  Was it geekery? was it criticism? It's another potential invisible line really.  


*** Flippancy warning***

The board is provided by Rebellion, but the money that pays for the board is presumably made from prog and nmeg and collection sales, so although I agree an official board may need some guidelines, it's not quite so clear cut as Rebellion are the givers and we are the takers. To  use the Rennie Dredd example for the last time, I paid to be insulted by the Meg - at least the creators here got cash from us first! :)  

I'm sorry Leigh... I think maybe you're taking things personally... if you're really genuinely offended by a humorous take on fans published in a comic, why keep reading?

I'm (again) not defending Gordon et al..  but let's try and keep some perspective hear.

Rebellion provide the messageboard... none of us personally paid for it, it's a part of their official website for their comic, 2000ad.

We have the right to discuss the contents, criticise, make suggestions, BUT do it civilly.

Not much to ask.

There's been no 'sacrificial lambs'. Only people taking quick and needless offense.

Anyway... I've got Tank Girl to draw...

Enjoy!

:-) rufus

"I'm sorry Leigh... I think maybe you're taking things personally... if you're really genuinely offended by a humorous take on fans published in a comic, why keep reading?"

I think the point is Rufus, is that it seemed to me entirely personal - "the listener"/"the Watcher" etc.  Even so, I wasnt particularly offended by it, though I imagine the writers intention was that I should have been.  If I'd really been offended, I'd probably have brought it up with Matt at Bristol, but you know, I'd entirely forgotten about it by then.   However, I do believe it's one thing having a strip that talks about fans (I love the Judge Spotters for example), it's another to have them based on (hell, not even based, but actually lifting) actual people on the board and describing them as smelly, self-important shelf stackers.  

Now, I was more bemused than offended, as were the others named in the strip and I think thats to  the fans credit - if only the creators could take criticism as well.   And really, should it be the comics job to potentially offend its readership? Especially a comic that has been at deaths door on numerous occassions - doesnt it need all the sales it can muster?  Maybe Philt could just say his review was a humourous take on the current progs? Anyway, enough of this old news -it is another discussion really, though tangentally lionked i think.  


In principle, I'm not against calls to be civil.  Me, I'm all for civility.  PhilT got the brunt of Thargs ire - I'd defend his review as having some content beyond "this was shit", even if you can argue other points about its level of unnecessary rudeness. I just feel Tharg needs to qualify himself a little less heatedly and more clearly.  If he doesnt like individuals, then move to ban them (though update your code of conduct first) - presumably he doesnt like any of the board, if his answer is to pull it?

Hey there Dr X. Glad to hear your lad got a day out!

Bolt-01

"I imagine the writers intention was that I should have been"

Hermeneutics! Cool. I had a postivist in my sociology class last week. A retired statistician. I couldn't persuade her of the benefits of interpretivism at all. She didn't approve of Max Weber one bit. She's wrong of course.

;)

And for those that haven't studied sociology...?

Leigh as I stated before I'm not defending Gordon, Rebellion, Matt, or anyone else.

 Personal slights aside, an eye for an eye is not the way forward.

Creators take criticisms on the chin all the time. They need not take abuse.

If you felt you'd been abused, bring it up with the Editorial channels, or the Writer, whom is contactable through this very accessible site.

I like 2000ad's fans, and appreciate every single one of them, as I'm sure Both the Editorial team and other creators do as well.

 2000ad will thrive on HEALTHY dialogue... but stored resentments and sniping will not help anyone (I'm not referring to you sir, before you ask!!)

I want to see a Comic where creators, fans and editorial can all happily, and healthily, converse in a constructive way to better our galay's finest.

 I'm not standing for public office by the way... ;-)

and Apologies if this all sounds like a lecture...

Yours sincerely,

 Rufus..

Guh. Okay, I'll try. ;)

Postivism is an extension of empiricism. The scientific method is the only way to discover new knowledge. Postivists in social science think that you can study society and social phenomena objectively. They love statistics.

Interpretivism is where you try to get inside people's heads by imagining what it's like to be them and see things from their point of view. It's the preferred method of social anthropologists. Hermeneutics is interpretivism where it comes to analyzing texts. From this it's a short jump to trying to get into the head of the author through reading his work.

Wow... social science explained! :-)

And now a picture to lighten the mood...

"Leigh as I stated before I'm not defending Gordon, Rebellion, Matt, or anyone else.

Personal slights aside, an eye for an eye is not the way forward."

Totally agree, and I dont think I'm advocating that anywhere - but on one hand we have a strip that ascribes pretty unsavoury characeristics to identifiable people on this board - on the other we have a guy who thinks his recent prog is the worst in a decade and (dismissively, sure) explains why in a way which is much less personally abusive than the strip in question.  It's not even a little toe for an eye really! :)

I'm not arguing that cos Rebellion are offensive we should be too - you'll not find an offensive post from me following that little debacle, and I'd like to think you'd have to go a way back to find me being really mean - and then it was probably about Mark Millar!  I am arguing that Rebellion seem to be confrontational and aggressive when they'd do better to actually talk to us here rather than berate us as a group.

You ever have a boss who would rather punish everyone with a sheepdip policy that hit out randomly rather than face tackling the one or two bad eggs causing the problem?  That's how this feels to me.  I'm not against Rebellion laying down some terms of use (though I believe they might stop honest but reasonable criticism if they take things too far), but I think a better way to do it would be with some open dialogue, not a one off post threatening to pull the board if we don't all pull our socks up.
 

I'm more interested in not seeing a repeat of the obvious breakdown in comunication, (as opposed to how many offensive , or in fact any offensive posts have been made in the past, and by whom.)

If people want more dialogue with 2000ad then tell them!

Write in, email in, ask in another thread for 'Tharg's hour' or something.

But constant reiteration by recriminations is just dull!

Let's be proactive!

;-) ruf... not at all procrastinating over work...

'of' recriminations... not 'by'...... my apologies... I'm tired.

:-) R

Rufus, yer diplomacy and the fact that you obviously care does you great credit. Now get back to work!

Bruce McLaren
(not the famous racing driver)

AKA Dog Deever

"we have a strip that ascribes pretty unsavoury characeristics to identifiable people on this board"

The most bizarre (and possibly offensive, I wouldn't know) aspect of that whole business was that the names of the geeks seem to have been chosen pretty much at random - unless there's something I'm missing - which could be read as contempt for fandom in general.

"I'm more interested in not seeing a repeat of the obvious breakdown in communication"

Same here, which is why I want Rebellion to properly explain their stance, rather than run in, shout at one poster (whose opinion was harsh, but in no way personal nor without some explanation as to his grievance), intimate that many more are all equally blame and then vanish into the night.  If Rebellion have a problem with people expressing opinions in a particular way, or particular opinions, then tell us, then tell those people - as it is it's Judge Fish all over again! :)

Anyway, hoping that's my last post on this subject til we get whatever it is that Wake has for us!

Bad things are often more noticable and more memorable than good.

Some people (including both fans and creators) seem to hold, express and therefore spread the the view that this board is unfriendly towards creators, which can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Someone looking for faults will inevitably be able to find them.

I think that this thread has probably reached it's useful limit, so please don't post any more to it unless you feel that you have something constructive to add. I would like to see it drift down the board, so that we can get back to a sense of normality, while bearing in mind what has been said here.

Once this thead is off the bottom, keep your eyes out for "It's a Droid's Life" (unless I think of a better name).

Cheers,

Wake

Fair enough Wake, but before the thread dies I just wanted to say goodbye to everyone, I'm taking a break from the board for a while. I hope it's still here when I come back!
Grud bless us one and all.

Paul Armer .pleased to meet you all!its a boring name and you have to spell out the surname EVERY $%£@@~!ing time! so i'm sticking with the mogzilla unless thargys monkeys say otherwise.

Sorry, I am fairly new here so this has probably been addressed, but:
And when it all decends into personal attacks on certain creators (see every thread ever started regarding Pat Mills), I think that's when a line needs to be drawn.

WTF? There may not even be a 2000ad if it wasn't for him. His contribution to the British comics industry is incomparable. I find it pretty sad if people are using this forum to make snide remarks about him.