On May 29, 12:36=A0am, Phantom scojocupcake <bo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On May 29, 12:24=A0am, Phantom scojocupcake <bo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > Who'd have thought that!
>
>
>http://www.2000adonline.com/?zone=3Dfan&page=3Dmessagethread&choice=3D226=
32...
>
> > People arguing with Matt Smith, eh?
>
> > Back in the 1980s all we had was a one page nerve centre letters page.
> > That was the only way to express your thoughts about 2000AD. How times
> > have changed. These days you can log onto the net and be rude to
> > 2000AD's editor and expect a reply. Now that's progress for you! LOL
>
> > scojomoo
>
> =A0scojomoo
>
> Ahem...
>
> "Or alternatively you could all use this messageboard in a civilised
> and considerate manner, which I seem to remember was my fairly simple
> and - so I thought - reasonable request in the first place."
>
> And, again, you may colour me mystified as to the supposed threshold
> that has been crossed that renders this board a disservice to
> Rebellion and 2000AD, as you claimed in your first post on this
> subject.
>
> We -- a small but vocal cross section of your fan base -- have been
> somewhat critical of what has, let's be honest, a lacklustre run of
> progs over the last few weeks.
>
> At the risk of invoking philt, you seem oblivious to the fact that we
> were all overwhelmingly positive about the title only a few weeks
> ago,
> with many of us lauding the title as the best it has been in years.
>
> What's more, for all the negative feedback, have you not noticed how
> people have been hanging on for the new line-up and are already
> making
> positive noises about it?
>
> No anthology title is ever going to be plain sailing. For the most
> part, some people will like some strips, and some other, and thereby
> the balance is maintained. Occasionally, the majority of strips are
> not met favourably, but it's not like we were threatening to leave en
> masse or demanding that writer or artist X never be given work again.
>
> The tone remains largely as it was and veiled references to sundry
> other offences help the discussion not one bit. Irreverence,
> disrespect and, indeed, outright rudeness are part of the character
> of
> 2000AD. That this board should reflect those key qualities speaks
> well
> of the board and the core nature of 2000AD that has sustained it over
> these last 30 years.
>
> If you would like to come back with specific instances of what you
> consider unacceptable behaviour that has appeared recently on this
> board then I will happily revise my position and opinion in light of
> them, but the unsup****ted assertions that we have seen thus far
> simply
> don't stack up to a justification of the way you have characterized
> this board.
>
> Make no mistake, Matt. I have nuff respeck for your tenure on 2000AD
> itself, and how you manage to put out the Megazine at all, never mind
> achieve any quality control is nothing short of superhuman.
>
> But I think you're off the mark here.
>
> Sorry.
>
> Jim
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I was never that bad. I'm a paragon of virtue and good manners
> compared to the mutinous lot over on the message board. I swear it's
> mutiny! "Mutiny, I say." The 2000AD fans are revolting.
>
> But a good make-over and they'll look less revolting.
>
> :)
>
> scojomoo
"s**** got away with his behaviour for ages.why did they keep letting
him back instead of waiting til now to make the theats of closure?
just a thought,new meg in paper rack needing reading!"
LOL!
Yeah, how come I lasted so long? Search me! I guess deep down
Rebellion loved me and wanted me to stay. Ahhhh. How sweet.
:)
scojomoo
|
