The online behavior of Comic Book Professionals

[Raphael Edwards]

The point is to give yourself a name attune to the subject in question.
Not to hide your real name, just have a different one.

Why did you choose to use a different alias when you were a DJ? Were you trying to hide your real one, as well as your real identity, or were you simply doing it because it´s what everybody does, it´s what’s expected in that world.

When I first joined this forum back in 07 I, obviously, didn´t know how it worked. I realized upon further research that 90% of the people registered were using aliases, naturally I assumed that it was how it worked, why? Not because they were trying to hide their real names, simply because it was funny and in attune the nature of the "game".

This started to become a problem when some came in here to insult a disrespect both writers and fellow cbranians.

To me, if I talk or discuss with someone here it makes no difference whatsoever to what his real name is. It didn´t matter back in the day that Mets was Cyberman, and it certainly doesn´t matter now.
If someone is being rude and disrespectful you simply report to the moderators or stop speaking to him, his real is of no relevance to the matter!

All of this is complete truth. But again, this saves time for all of those excuses of anonymity.

[ShaggyB]

The point is to give yourself a name attune to the subject in question.
Not to hide your real name, just have a different one.

You seem to be under the impression that i think its wrong... which is not the case. It still does not change the fact that you, like me... are hidden.

Why did you choose to use a different alias when you were a DJ? Were you trying to hide your real one, as well as your real identity, or were you simply doing it because it´s what everybody does, it´s what’s expected in that world.

specifically it was because it was a nickname i had due to a haircut I tend to sport. I also went by my real name at times too. but thats a different story.

When I first joined this forum back in 07 I, obviously, didn´t know how it worked. I realized upon further research that 90% of the people registered were using aliases, naturally I assumed that it was how it worked, why? Not because they were trying to hide their real names, simply because it was funny and in attune the nature of the "game".

and thats probably true... however it doesnt change that those 90% are hidden behind screen names. Again, I think you are trying to put purpose in when that isnt what i was saying at all. Its more a consequence of playing the "game".

This started to become a problem when some came in here to insult a disrespect both writers and fellow cbranians.

To me, if I talk or discuss with someone here it makes no difference whatsoever to what his real name is. It didn´t matter back in the day that Mets was Cyberman, and it certainly doesn´t matter now.
If someone is being rude and disrespectful you simply report to the moderators or stop speaking to him, his real is of no relevance to the matter!

exactly. But that doesnt change what using a screen name effectively does. Its fun, I do it too... but, regardless of intent, it still creates a sheild between me and my real name. That is all I was saying

BTW in double posted, how do i delete the one i don´t want?

you dont. If I see it, i remove it. Or you could report it and one of us will see it and remove it.

[Ari Gold]

examples please?

You're asking me for examples where Mr. Wacker simply attacked the credibility of the poster instead of actually responding to the statements made in the post?

[ShaggyB]

Fair enough. But the only reason this very thread exists is because it is a recurring thing on CBR. Which is why though I may not have been around for whatever incident you mention, it doesn't happen on a regular weekly/monthly basis with anyone else.

that you know of. Again, just be thankful you are shielded from a lot of things and enjoy your time here.

[Ari Gold]

that you know of. Again, just be thankful you are shielded from a lot of things and enjoy your time here.

Yes, you keep suggesting that it happens way more often, but Mr. Wacker takes pride in the fact that several times a year a thread like this pops up. Clearly it is a recurring concern for many posters, and one that is unlike other Professionals time here. If this is not the case, could you link us to this thread for other Professionals in recent months?

[ShaggyB]

You're asking me for examples where Mr. Wacker simply attacked the credibility of the poster instead of actually responding to the statements made in the post?

no. more unclear on what you are trying to say.

[Ari Gold]

no. more unclear on what you are trying to say.

Sure. The responses from the thread I had in mind from last week appear to have been deleted, so I can't pull them up. But I'll be sure to point them out when I see them around next.

[Chris S.]

I think we need to take a vote of no contest and close this thread.

[Mister Mets]

Are people doing that? That is messed up.

Edit: I don't see that in the thread...I only see well wishes as it should be.

There were two deleted posts, although I didn't think either was that bad. These were cracks about supervillains or Stephen Wacker taking over his body. It just wasn't appropriate for a thread about wishing a guy we all like and respect a speedy recovery.

[Lars C]

By the way, can one change username? If I for example wanted to use a real name?

[Kurt Busiek]

For sure. Just wondering if the reason though is that all those other professionals simply take the jabs and don't respond disrespectfully, or do they not find themselves in that situation since they treat the posters/fans here with mutual respect.

Third option: Some of those pros aren't likely to get as much snark, because they're not doing the same job.

For instance, Steve gets a ton more online anger aimed at him than I do, in part because he edits the Spider-Man books, and if someone's annoyed at what's going on in them, they vent at the guy they can find. I get more online anger aimed at me than Walt Simonson does. Plus, Walt is a nicer, calmer guy than I am, less likely to get into arguments, and I'm -- well, I wouldn't say nicer, but less sarcastic, for sure -- than Steve.

In general, the higher up the editorial chain you go, the more anger you attract, because there's always going to be someone unhappy with something. I can't think of an EIC in the internet era who hasn't been hated and excoriated online -- and if the internet had been around in the 1960s, Stan Lee and Julie Schwartz would have been getting double-barrelled venom from fans angry about one development or other. Whoever's editing the biggest books has been getting a lot of anger, too, and so on down the line.

On top of that, some people do, as you say, ignore the jabs -- my online style is generally reasonable and polite, but there are people I ignore and even one or two I've blocked, because I just don't have the time and energy for their kind of games. But that's my response. Steve's response is different, but it's not wrong -- there's no set of rules that demands that if you bark at a comics pro online, they won't laugh at you for doing it. Heck, Mort Weisinger's lettercols used to give the occasional snotty answer to Superman fans, back in the 60s, when Mort (or whoever) thought they were being dopey.

If I block a persistent axe-to-grind-er and Steve pokes fun at him, those are both the kind of reactions you get if you're going to interact with people online. Working as a pro in the comics field doesn't come with a demand that you be a punching bag in your spare time.

But just like with the comics, everyone's in control of their own experience. If you don't like a comic, you can stop buying it. If you don't like the way interaction with a particular pro online goes, you don't have to interact.

If you keep doing it, regardless of how angry and frustrated it makes you, well, salmon swimming upstream to spawn swim up waterfalls because of genetic compulsion. Nobody here is a salmon, so if they do it, they're doing it by choice.

If they don't like it, they should probably do something else rather than demand that other people change to suit them. They get to control their own choices, after all, and the other people get to control theirs.

kdb

[Chris S.]

By the way, can one change username? If I for example wanted to use a real name?

Go back a page or two. There is a thread for that in the CBR Q and A section where you can change your name. You get one change though so make it good, and they prefer real names.

[Mark_S]

Once you put someone on the ignore list though you have to acknowledge to yourself that you've sort of failed. You aren't quite tolerant or civilized enough yet in your life. That the anger and resentment has gotten so bad that it impossible to have any sort conversation because you'll always be expecting the shot and so probably will the other person. It's the point in a face to face conversation where you take off you glove, slap the other person and you both start choosing pistols or swords at dawn. No one that I know of in real life ever gets to this point, but online? It can happen. I reached that choice with Wacker and I've felt a bit of regret at times, at least until I've seen him go through the same routine with other posters. I can live with the failure. I have a feeling if it were not for the editorial path marvel chose from AD on it would be different, but from AD on... the raw cynicism that in my opinion I saw in marvel was just too much for me and online Wacker is the primary defender of that cynicism.
So I think we're both happier not talking to each other. He can say what ever he wants about me -though I doubt he says much at all, he's got fresher targets with this MJ things going on- and I won't see it and hopefully whatever I say about him won't be seen by him.

[Mister Mets]

Fair enough. But the only reason this very thread exists is because it is a recurring thing on CBR. Which is why though I may not have been around for whatever incident you mention, it doesn't happen on a regular weekly/monthly basis with anyone else.

You could also say that the thread exists because people complain about it.

Wacker and Slott are also more active on CBR than most professionals, so that could also be a factor.

By the way, can one change username? If I for example wanted to use a real name?

Sure. It's encouraged.

http://forums.comicbookresources.com...dated-02-08-11

I know that in your case, there were a few people who initially thought that you were a previously banned poster trying to circumvent an old ban. That's a problem that sometimes happens with message boards. It even happened on CBR since you joined, with two of our most annoying previously banned users creating new accounts to talk about Amazing Spider-Man #700 (They've since been rebanned).

I don't know the appropriate solution to avoiding suspicions when it's sometimes merited, and sometimes not, as in your case.

[oldschool]

Third option: Some of those pros aren't likely to get as much snark, because they're not doing the same job.

For instance, Steve gets a ton more online anger aimed at him than I do, in part because he edits the Spider-Man books, and if someone's annoyed at what's going on in them, they vent at the guy they can find. I get more online anger aimed at me than Walt Simonson does. Plus, Walt is a nicer, calmer guy than I am, less likely to get into arguments, and I'm -- well, I wouldn't say nicer, but less sarcastic, for sure -- than Steve.

In general, the higher up the editorial chain you go, the more anger you attract, because there's always going to be someone unhappy with something. I can't think of an EIC in the internet era who hasn't been hated and excoriated online -- and if the internet had been around in the 1960s, Stan Lee and Julie Schwartz would have been getting double-barrelled venom from fans angry about one development or other. Whoever's editing the biggest books has been getting a lot of anger, too, and so on down the line.

On top of that, some people do, as you say, ignore the jabs -- my online style is generally reasonable and polite, but there are people I ignore and even one or two I've blocked, because I just don't have the time and energy for their kind of games. But that's my response. Steve's response is different, but it's not wrong -- there's no set of rules that demands that if you bark at a comics pro online, they won't laugh at you for doing it. Heck, Mort Weisinger's lettercols used to give the occasional snotty answer to Superman fans, back in the 60s, when Mort (or whoever) thought they were being dopey.

If I block a persistent axe-to-grind-er and Steve pokes fun at him, those are both the kind of reactions you get if you're going to interact with people online. Working as a pro in the comics field doesn't come with a demand that you be a punching bag in your spare time.

But just like with the comics, everyone's in control of their own experience. If you don't like a comic, you can stop buying it. If you don't like the way interaction with a particular pro online goes, you don't have to interact.

If you keep doing it, regardless of how angry and frustrated it makes you, well, salmon swimming upstream to spawn swim up waterfalls because of genetic compulsion. Nobody here is a salmon, so if they do it, they're doing it by choice.

If they don't like it, they should probably do something else rather than demand that other people change to suit them. They get to control their own choices, after all, and the other people get to control theirs.

kdb

Excellent response, Kurt!