The online behavior of Comic Book Professionals

[ShaggyB]

Excuse me here but, so what? It's his writing being called lazy. A, has his his entirety of humanity being worthless. That > lazy writing to me simply because it encompasses more and says that his writing is of little to no consequence in the grand scheme of things. Unless you think a writer or any artist values a personal opinion of their writing over their existence common or not. I'm sure they've experienced both enough times.

So you are suggesting that it should be against the rules to not like someone?

[Raphael Edwards]

So you are suggesting that it should be against the rules to not like someone?

I'm saying that saying it is more offensive. Period.

[Nova2814.1]

Do you have an example where they are "going off" without first having harsher things than that being said by a poster in the chain or a prior to it? Seems more a case of you believing they would act a certain way.

The Page Count thread comes to mind. That's a good example of an industry employee coming into a thread and completely disrupting the discussion. As far as I can recall, the employee wasn't even mentioned in the thread until he joined in, so he had no reason to take anything said personally. And by the end of the discussion, he certainly went off at me more than a few times.

And before anyone says anything, this isn't me dragging up ancient history or the like, I'm just providing a clear example of the behaviour Shaggy referred to.

[ShaggyB]

I'm saying that saying it is more offensive. Period.

I disagree completely based on the fact that its a dream to believe that everyone is going to like everyone else. (hasnt worked to well for the x-men either )

[Ari Gold]

I disagree completely based on the fact that its a dream to believe that everyone is going to like everyone else.

Nobody is denying that . . . the question is whether or not people should voice on message boards that they don't like said other people as human beings . . .

And the more relevant question is if people are allowed to not like something Marvel does, or something the Spider-Man crew does, and if they don't are they allowed to express that on the Boards without expecting to be ridiculed and mocked irrelevant of their actual opinions.

[Raphael Edwards]

I disagree completely based on the fact that its a dream to believe that everyone is going to like everyone else.

Just like it's a dream to believe that everyone is gonna like everyone else's writing when they comment on it.

The only difference is that you all clarify calling them a name, or in this case, their writing a name a violation of the rules.

"Unless you feel everyone should bite their tongues and not say what they really feel about a writers work" is comparable to "Unless you feel everyone should like everyone else."

Why does one have to be censored and not the other when both are offensive?

[Kevin Nichols]

I think I'm going to be Raphael Edwards's friend now. Not that I agree with him. I just think Schmitty is awful.

[Raphael Edwards]

I think I'm going to be Raphael Edwards's friend now. Not that I agree with him. I just think Schmitty is awful.

Yay! I've got a new friend.

[Schmed]

I think I'm going to be Raphael Edwards's friend now. Not that I agree with him. I just think Schmitty is awful.

You're the worst! It still smells like gym socks and broken dreams from the last time you were at my place! IDIOT!

[wleakr]

Let it go man, you're frothing at the mouth over here. Everyone else got exactly what I was saying, so much so I've gotten PM's about it. It's time to stop flogging the dead horse Ralph.

Wow...a lot has happened with this thread while I was at work...lol!

Anyway, I didn't get what you were saying before, so "everyone" didn't get it!

To chime in on the "A" or "B"...which is a subjective call, but "A" is worse to me. If I were getting a job eval from my boss and they labelled an area of my job as "lazy", I would be upset, but I could at least take it constructively and try to improve in that area out of the many other areas evaluated (at least in that particular individuals eyes). So if writing was the broad category, maybe my plotting could be labelled as lazy and needing improvement...

But in the same eval, if my boss said he had no use for me as a person, that's basically saying you have no use for me at all and its no point of even trying to improve...nothing in that persons eyes will see value in anything I have to offer...granted, you wouldn't get told this outright in an eval to prevent a lawsuit...

I wouldn't want my work ethic attacked, but that's just a subset of the total...another example...if I told my girl I hated her cooking, she most likely will not be pleased with that statement, but I can like several other areas about her beside that and she could stay in a positive relationship with me, knowing I think her cooking is lazy...saying I can't stand her as a human being is basically dissolving the relationship...much more offensive in my eyes...

[Schmed]

To chime in on the "A" or "B"...which is a subjective call, but "A" is worse to me. If I were getting a job eval from my boss and they labelled an area of my job as "lazy", I would be upset, but I could at least take it constructively and try to improve in that area out of the many other areas evaluated (at least in that particular individuals eyes). So if writing was the broad category, maybe my plotting could be labelled as lazy and needing improvement...

But in the same eval, if my boss said he had no use for me as a person, that's basically saying you have no use for me at all and its no point of even trying to improve...nothing in that persons eyes will see value in anything I have to offer...granted, you wouldn't get told this outright in an eval to prevent a lawsuit...

Choice A wasn't about having no use for someone as a person, it was about disliking someone as a person. Not sure if that will change how you think about A and B but it is worth bringing up. For instance, I dislike the guy who runs the local organic market in my neighborhood (he's a real douchebag) but I certainly have a use for him. I'd rather someone didn't like me as a person while realizing I was a hard worker (at whatever) than someone saying "I like you but damn you're lazy!" Dsilike doesn't have to be rude or insulting, but calling someone lazy can only be that....unless of course said person IS lazy but that's a whole different discussion.

[Schmed]

Anyway, I didn't get what you were saying before

Not something you should admit publicly. So ALMOST everyone got it. I stand corrected.

[Ari Gold]

Choice A wasn't about having no use for someone as a person, it was about disliking someone as a person. Not sure if that will change how you think about A and B but it is worth bringing up. For instance, I dislike the guy who runs the local organic market in my neighborhood (he's a real douchebag) but I certainly have a use for him. I'd rather someone didn't like me as a person while realizing I was a hard worker (at whatever) than someone saying "I like you but damn you're lazy!" Dsilike doesn't have to be rude or insulting, but calling someone lazy can only be that....unless of course said person IS lazy but that's a whole different discussion.

Yeah, and I rather the people who meet me do the opposite "hey, you're a good guy, and I like your work for the most part, but I think you really mailed it in with that one" vs. "I don't like you as a person or a human being and will never buy anything you ever work on". But different strokes for different folks.

[Ari Gold]

Not something you should admit publicly. So ALMOST everyone got it. I stand corrected.

Really? Dude, you changed what you were talking about when you realized you didn't actually believe what you originally said . . . Nobody else is speaking up because it's mostly irrelevant, and tangential to the overall thread.

[wleakr]

Choice A wasn't about having no use for someone as a person, it was about disliking someone as a person. Not sure if that will change how you think about A and B but it is worth bringing up.

These were the choices:

Which is "worse":

A) I don't like Wacker as a person and a human being

or

B) I think Slott's writing on that story was lazy

So, not liking someone as a human being would be pretty offensive...a person who doesn't care about you as a person in whole will not care about your work at all...however, being lazy in 1 area, doesn't mean it applies in all facets of your character...your example works if the person thinks you're lazy in everything you do, and if that's the case then A and B might as well be the same statement, because they see no use for you...

Very few people can still like you and feel you're a completely lazy person at the same time unless you're working for a competitor (i.e. the laziness works to their benefit)!