Messages

You needed your wife to tell you that you're all man?
See- that handbag is starting it's evil purpose already!

The man's got a point.

[!]

!

Man, that's bad. I'm glad I missed it.

He spelt 'Drokk!' wrong.
FAIL.

PJ- you do realise that, now you have a manbag, you're going to have to 'get some one in' to get the lids off jars...

It's pretty mild really.
Is it really any different from deciphering the slang in Halo Jones, Mega-City one, Nikolai Dante etc, or something like the Red Seas or even from some of the archaic Americanisms in Ichabod?.
It's the same for someone outside of England reading, say, Stickleback or some parts of Savage. It adds colour and flavour to the characters and stories- it would be erse if all the dialogue was in straight flat QOE. Ken?

Well, since you've been emasculated, you could use it too keep your genitals in.

Got mine in my local newsagent yesterday- was a bit surprised at that.
Hell- I enjoyed it. Didn't read most of the text stuff other than a cursory scan over. I haven't read any of the content before so it was all new to me. I enjoyed it. Kick Ass 2 was, well it was Kick Ass and I liked it.

Turf was great, I was rather surprised at how good it was. The artwork is nice and a good fit for the story. I thought it lent the story a kind of gravitas that I didn't anticipate, knowing that it was 'about mobsters, vampires & aliens' and that it was written by Jonathan Ross. And it was a good solid chunk of story to digest. There was a sequence on p15 that I particularly liked- a nice little snippet of writing pulling elements of the story together.

Nemesis is about spandex capers- point against. But it seems quite nasty brutal and interesting. The only 'superhero' stuff I have any real love for is 'Zenith','Kev' and 'The Boys', but I'm still interested.

I don't see what's so bad about Frankie's strip either- I'm with Prof, I've read a lot worse and I don't go a lot beyond 2000ad. For me the writing is meant to be slightly quirky- I wouldn't have expected anything else tbh, but it's the somewhat poor artwork in the early part of the episode that put me off a bit. Things weren't too clear and there's a page where I'm not entirely sure what went on overall, but it may settle into a rhythm- it's the first episode of a new story by a new writer so I think it's too early to call really. I'm still looking to read some more.
Haven't read the short piece yet, but I will.

I'm in for number 2, but there had better be either some cyber-tattoo transfers or else boobage- one or the other. Succeed or fail, if it goes any way towards building a better comics culture here then it would be churlish to pour scorn upon it.
Though I am a churl.

Deary me... some damn fool will be nominating him for a KTT next!

Been working my way through some old Western comics I got in a charity shop for 10p each- 4 'Sundance Western' from Illustrated World Library Series (2 from 1962 and 2 from 1963) and 2 'Sabre Library-Western Stories in Pictures' from 1971 and 72. There's some really nice artwork in these- they're a bit like Commando style books.

I also bought 3 other Cowboy ones for 10p each, but I didn't flick through before buying and when I got them home I discovered there were NO PICTURES in them AT ALL- all text!
Fuckin' writers...

That goes double for Paisley...

Dog: if you where being tongue in cheek about the Wiki page then it was not obvious... What did come across was you accusing me of altering something to benefit myself and my point of view.

Bullshit- I said you 'could have', not 'you did' there is no accusation there so don't try to twist it. Any fucking moron can see that.

I am not being passive aggressive.

Bullshit- your snidey comment tried to imply that I was stupid, but you didn't have the balls to say it directly. By your own definition you tried a bullying tactic, you've lost the moral high ground you attempted to take, which makes you a hypocrite, so shut the fuck up.

Calling some one a name during an argument and then saying it is part of  discussion and debate, that's passive aggressive.

No it isn't- direct confrontation is aggressive, there is nothing passive about it.

come to think of it accusing some one of altering a wiki page and then saying its a was a joke, i]that's[/i] passive aggressive as well.

True, but I didn't accuse you, so fuck off.

And the thing is people aren't lining up to kick Jim. Most people either agree with his conduct, or think that he possible said something a bit silly when wound up and ended up being a bit rude.

You accused him of bullying and waved wiki definitions and cited quotes to back up your pathetic claim. After you thought he was gone.

And I do not need to talk to some one who has experienced real bullying. I am someone who has experienced real bullying on a daily basis for most of my school life.

Did the big boys call you a dick? I'm not surprised- my heart bleeds for you.

And for at one time I was a bully.

Did you call them a 'stinky poo' back?
And your snide comment to try to paint me as stupid was bullying by your own definition, so you're still a bully (by your definition).

And during the thread at the time i did say some thing

"However, James E is just pointing out another POV. One in which is not quite so pleased with how the way in which the ret con is going. If you dont agree thats fine but at least respect the fact that there are other POVs rather than trying to bully him in to submission."

Fair enough- others didn't, but did you report his 'bullying'? No- because you know you're talking shit.

All you are doing is revealing yourself as pond life.
And yes, I am rude- I never made any claim not to be.
Fuck off you dick.

How long have ye been huddin' on tae yer pish for Flip?

[Why not?]

as I said, my response was due to the insinuation that I had edited the Wiki page.

Aw c'mon Tweak man, there was no insinuation- I didn't allude to anything, I said it plain and simple.
Of course I don't believe you typed that essay up 10 minutes before posting (and I don't believe for a minute that you thought that's what I was saying). It was a tongue in cheek comment on the fact that anyone can make/ edit a wiki entry and you cannot compare Wikipedia to an real encyclopaedia, which is why it is not an acceptable reference in academia. Sure I was oversimplifying and being a bit daft, but only to make a point, and I think it was fairly obvious that I wasn't being totally serious. Besides, I don't hide behind insinuation- I say it as I see it and I'm not afraid to say what I think, nor do a give a shit what anyone thinks of me for doing it. If you don't like me or my posts, stick me on the ignore, I'll live and won't notice anyway.

Define 'hurtful'.
It's subjective.
Just because some idiot playacts being offended specifically to get someone into trouble doesn't really mean they have been bullied. I made my protest at your passive-aggressive post in jest (and it was an insinuation that I was stupid- it can't really be taken any other way), but seriously- you just perpetrated what you have spoken out against, that's hypocrisy plain and simple - I didn't take offence because I'm not a moron, but I was attempting to illustrate how easy it was to claim bullying- another guy could have called you for it and under YOUR OWN DEFINITION they would have been right- so think about that.

I work in education with kids that folk consider delinquents and also work with prisoners. Like TB, I see real bullying in real life more than you've had hot dinners- and it is far and away different from someone saying they think 'x' is a dick. Honestly, this is whining, panty-waist shit. Just because some arse writes their definition doesn't make it correct- talk to someone who has been properly bullied to find out what real bullying is.

Seeing as we are discussing the whole affair in the open like adults, I wasn't going to say this to keep the peace, but I feel like I need to for my own sanity, so here goes...

What is really getting my dander up is the fact that some people are lining up to have a kick at Jim now he's gone, and yet none of you had the balls to tackle him mano-a-mano while he was here to defend his position.
I'm finding this distasteful as fuck, not to mention cuntery of the worst kind- it's just cowardice plain and simple. People seem to be getting on their moral high horses about it, but their principles were oh so important that they didn't tackle him about their perception of him being a bully when he was here.
Why not?

My suspicion is that there was a fear of getting their arses handed on a plate because it's bullshit and they know it. It's despicable, and in all seriousness I mean it. If they hadn't the testicular fortitude to say it to the man, then they don't have any moral right to whine about it now. IMO- put up at the time, or shut up entirely.
I would imagine that even if he was thinking about changing his mind, he certainly won't now that the woodlice have crawled out of the woodwork to kick him when he isn't looking.

I thought this was a great place full of good people, but I'm certainly going to have to revise my view of that. If anyone feels I'm having a go at them personally, I probably am- If the cap fits then pop it on at a jaunty angle. If this upsets anyone or causes any offence- bite me, I couldn't give a shit.

And no- I'm not defending a mate, I don't know Jim at all, I've barely had a conversation with the guy since I joined up years ago and until this new version of the board came into being (where you can see if anyone is ignoring you) I assumed that he had me on the old 'killfile' for this very reason- so in the back of my mind, I was always a bit suspicious that there was no love for me with him. I would defend any one of the people who have earned my respect here just as vigorously because I believe what is going on now is just plain wrong, and all because of some mewling and puking from dicks who can't handle their public opinions being questioned.

Frankly, I'm extremely disappointed.