Re: Best Sandman Volume? (Was: Allan Moore Rocks)

In article <rbr1j1ttmku36u4dsg5avg42v45tjha11h@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Ralf Haring  <haring@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 03:26:45 +0000 (UTC), mchary@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (Michael
>Alan Chary) wrote:
>>In article <o5b1j15ud9gpckt76k49071jn2bq9mqda8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>>Ralf Haring  <haring@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>>I do not think that is an accurate *****sment of the title *at all*.
>>
>>Well, you are at odds with Karen Berger's *****sment of the first 7
issues 
>>as ****trayed in her introduction to issue 8:
>
>I thought it had been well-covered that the first couple issues were
>in no way representative of the bulk of the series, meaning the
>following 70-something issues comprising nine of the ten collected
>volumes. I'm sorry your server didn't get all those messages.

And I'm soorry you didn't read my first post which said "Start with vol. 
2."


>>I'm not saying it was impenetrable, merely that I think that if someone 
>>wanted to get a taste of Gaiman, vol. 2 might be better than vol. 1. I 
>>also said I was not the best judge, but seeing as how *Karen*Berger*
>>said so, I'm inclined to stick with it. Of course, I'm just guessing.
Like 
>>I said, *I* didn't read it in the trades. I read it in the issues. I
just 
>>think the first few issues might be a touch confusing.
>
>I'm sorry. I misunderstood you. I thought you said the series dealt
>with concepts in the DCU which have been around for 50 years prior,
>and was a direct market book aimed at people already familiar with the
>concepts.

Yes, that's because you read a post made in response to another post, and 
responded to it without considerationm for context, which is why you're 
Ann Coulter.
-- 
An experiment in publi****ng:
http://www.ethshar.com/thesprigganexperiment0.html
The All-New, All-Different Howling Curmudgeons!
http://www.whiterose.org/howlingcurmudgeons