Rumor Control

So as I mentioned earlier, someone on Reddit took the comment that I’ve made about “Young Justice” any number of times, put his own spin on it, and suddenly the Internet was alive with assertions that I had had a meeting with Netflix about a third season of YJ.

What fascinates me is the number of websites who posted reports of the guy’s false claim as opposed to the number who contacted me for verification.

The answer? None. Not a single website bothered to contact me via Twitter (until after the fact) or email, even though my email address is public.

One site recently wound up posted on Facebook and I got fed up. I wrote an admittedly scathing note stating that the writer/editor (so he bills himself) had been journalistically remiss in not bothering to contact me; that such a lapse was inexcusable and he should take the non-story down immediately. The fact that it said in the story that it was unsubstantiated rumor infuriated me even more. What was the point in printing something that you yourself declared was unreliable?

His response? He apologized profusely.

Kidding: He threw a hissy fit. He called me names, declared that he’d been a big supporter of the show but now hoped it would rot, and was no longer a fan of mine.

Now am I being old fashioned? Is it my BA in journalism or my old reporter’s instincts being applied to non-journalism? It may well be me, but I simply do not understand the point of publishing unsubstantiated rumors, especially when (1) they can be easily double checked and (2) can cause damage. As I said, if enough people believed that a third season of YJ was a go, they might well say “Mission accomplished!” and stop watching it on Netflix, which would damage the cause. So falsely reporting the existence of a third season could well ensure there won’t be one.

Say what you will about Rich Johnston–and God knows a lot has been said–but there have been a number of occasions where he has written to me in researching an article for “Bleeding Cool” and asked for verification. At which point he runs the story with my comments included or, several times, has dropped the article because it was baseless. That’s how you do it.

If you’re a private blog and you say, “I heard this was said,” yeah, okay, I can kind of see it. Not thrilled, but I understand. But if you are a general comic book blog, then I’m sorry, but I think that you have a journalistic obligation to double check something before putting it up there. Because people don’t remember that you said, “This isn’t verified.” Half the time they don’t even remember where they read it; they just remember what they read (or even better, just read the headline) and will then repeat it, and the next thing you know, damaging misinformation is being widely disseminated as fact.

PAD

112 comments on “Rumor Control

  1. So while you were writing this post declaring yourself Rumor Control, did you envision an alien xenomorph emerging from the ceiling and eating you at any point?

    Or am I misunderstanding the allusion?

    Fortunately, the only place I read out the YJ stuff is right here. My response: I’m re-watching YJ on Netflix.

  2. These days it’s all about gathering clicks and using keywords to get them. There’s no such thing as journalistic standards, fact checking and many articles simply keep copying each other. Sadly, by the same token, many readers never see more than whatever inflammatory headline they slap up. We won’t even start on reading critically…

    Sorry you’re going through this.

  3. No journalistic integrity. It is like the Wild Wild West, people can say whatever they want and if it gets retweeted enough they pray it becomes fact. Cmon site and bloggers, get it together and stop being such immature bullies… PAD if it is about you, I’ll get it from you. You I can trust….

    1. Have you considered that, due to the lingering effects of your foolish attempts to behave like a Petty Tyrant and administer punishment to ScansDaily, that most websites find you utterly repulsive and refuse to contact you no matter what the reason?

      Seriously: do you have any clue just how people on the internet just plain hate your friggin’ guts?

      1. NOW I understand! NOW I get it! You’re a Scans Daily douche!

        You see, folks, Jack has been relentlessly attacking for several months now. No matter how innocent the post–on losing weight or whatever–he has attempted to attack me. I’ve been routinely trashing his posts because it’s one thing to attack my views or disagree and something else to just relentlessly slam this site’s host for no reason that I could discern. I had no idea who he was, no clue what in God’s name I had done to him. And since I didn’t feel like giving voice to someone who clearly just wanted a venue to hate me, I wasn’t letting him post. Yes, I know it’s in violation of my usual credo of letting people say whatever they want here, but that’s when it comes to voicing opinions. Not unsustained and unreasoning assault.

        But now I get it. Jack is one of the Scans Daily idiots. You remember them. The ones who blamed me because their incessant reproduction of huge swathes of material in violation of copyright laws caused their host to shut down their site. These yahoos blamed me for it and retaliated every way they could, from flooding this site with verbal assaults to trashing my Wikipedia page. And when they, in short order, reconstituted their site, they decided to show me up by banning any posts of any of my work. And Jack is still blaming me for that idiocy from, what? Seven years ago? Because the memory of elephants pales in comparison to the relentless nastiness that is an Internet denizen with a grudge.

        So from now on I’ll let Jack rail on against me because at least now I know what he’s pìššëd about. And Jack: it was nearly a decade ago. I’m sick of being the whipping boy for an incident in which I did absolutely nothing wrong. Get over it.

        PAD

  4. When people have no oversight or likelihood of being called on their statements it’s easy to say anything. They get kind of defensive when I cross-examine them on a witness stand. This problem becomes worse with the internet. When there are controls, whether an editor, or my case a judge, you are less likely to make statements without verification. As one poster above stated, it is indeed the wild west out there.

    PAD I understand your ire when you sent the “F*** you, nasty letter to follow” message. Hitting that send key can sometimes be very satisfying. Yesterday, I almost sent a “intemperate” email to an opponent, then thought better and had my associate proof read it. She deleted the entire message.

  5. I feel like I’ve read this post before, down to the hissy fit. I gather this is not an uncommon occurrence.

    1. It’s what happens when you tell a small person that his attempt to look big merely looks ridiculous.

  6. Believe it or not, I’ve never actually been on ScansDaily. However, I have heard a great deal about that incident, and my primary source of such info was, well…YOU.

    You are correct about my memory, though. I remember idiotic things you’ve said and written from long, LONG back. Stuff you’ve probably forgotten all about–though, considering your oft-stated poor memory, that could easily cover anything from last week.

    Why did I reference ScansDaily, then? I used it simply as one example to illustrate why you’re so utterly reviled on the Internet and other media. I could have used others. For example, your utterly áššhølìšh trashing of Charles Schulz’ talent, written after the man had died and been rendered unable to defend himself. The way you childishly shifted blame for the unpopularity of the Ned-Leeds-as-Hobgoblin reveal to Jim Oswley/Christopher Priest, then to Spider-Man fans who “just didn’t get it”, and then finally to Alan Kupperberg. The way you immaturely blamed Joe Quesada, Bill Jemas, et al. for the poor sales on Captain Marvel, only to pathetically try to backtrack with “You’re supposed to assume I blame myself because I’m…uh..Jewish, and therefore neurotic…” which I’m sure the vast majority of non-neurotic Jews really appreciated reading.

    Those are just examples off the top of my head. Should I itemize some more?

    I do give you credit for making no attempt to excuse your hero Harlan Ellison’s sexual assault of Connie Willis, as tempting as that no doubt was.

    No, ScansDaily was just one incident of many I selected. If you need to believe that was my prime motivation, go right ahead. It beats having to finally face just how many people utterly cannot stand you due to your own actions, doesn’t it?

    1. Thanks for the correction. Your mindset is certainly in line with the Scans Daily folks, so I think it’s understandable that I would make that conclusion.

      You can itemize all the BS you want. But it’s ridiculous. I “trashed” Schulz’s talent? No: I simply said the strip wasn’t as funny as I remembered it being, and I wrote that BECAUSE he had passed away and consequently I was reading old strips for the first time. I “shifted blame” for the Ned Leeds reveal? Absurd: I knew going in that the fans would likely hate it, but it was the best I could come up with, period. Blame Joe and Jemas for sales on Captain Marvel? Pure BS. I took issue with the decision to raise the price, but that was all. And the comment about Harlan I’m just going to ignore.

      As for whether people can stand me or not, that’s irrelevant to the discussion, especially since the “journalist” I wrote about had stated that he was a fan of mine. Furthermore, whether he is a fan or not is beside the point: a journalist has a responsibility to check his stories. All journalists do. Doesn’t matter if they’re fans or pointlessly hate my guts, and not all your pretend comments about things I said or didn’t say don’t change that.

      PAD

      1. Mr. David,

        It’s funny, because Time just had an article about Jack Riegel. http://time.com/4457110/internet-trolls/?iid=sr-link1

        Well, not him SPECIFICALLY, but his breed.

        He’s obviously a troll, and as a troll there is no pleasing him. One would think that if he truly couldn’t stand you, he’d stop coming to your site and reading your blog.

        And I’m pretty sure that he’d never say any of the things that he’s posted (or tried to post,) to your face. If he were to approach you at a convention, all he’d ask is if you could sign his copy of “The Death of Jean DeWolfe” trade.

        Matt Dow

      2. I certainly was itemizing your BS. The only ridiculous thing is how you just attempted to minimize the offensiveness of all of it.

        Yes, you did trash Schulz’ talent. You stated you “discovered mediocrity” in the man’s work, and you received a well-deserved asskicking in the CBG lettercolumn because of it. You deserved a hundred times worse. You still have no clue what utter gall you displayed, don’t you? Millions of people around the dámņëd globe loved the man’s work for decades, but according to you, this “mediocrity” had just lain there unsuspected the whole time–until you, not unlike the archaelogical team that located the sunken city of Crete, discovered it and chose to inform everyone of it. It wouldn’t surprise me one bit to find out that you expected people to thank you for this Enlightenment. Were you expecting hundreds of people to chime in with “Good Gosh! I had no idea how mediocre Schulz’ work was until you informed me! Thanks for setting me straight, Peter David, writer with a capital W!” What on Earth were you trying to accomplish with that garbage anyway? What were you thinking? WERE you thinking?

        And here’s the supreme irony: Around this same time Roger Zelazny died, and on one comic site some dipshit posted “Good. His writing had turned to crap anyway.” A certain person immediately lambasted the dipshit for his dipshittyness, and proceeded to hold up the dipshit as a prime example of fan áššhølìšhņëšš. That certain guy? YOU.

        So what is the lesson here? When a non-PAD person trashes a dead creator of superior talent: Bad, Bad, Bad. When Peter David trashes a dead creator who had more talent in a toenail clipping than Peter David has ever possessed in his whole career: Why, that’s perfectly all right.

        And, yes, you absolutely did try to shift blame away from yourself in the Hobgoblin debacle. The fact that you knew fans would hate it from the onset doesn’t disprove that. You first blamed Owsley/Priest, and when he shot back and disputed you, you changed your tune and declared “It did make sense, but those fans just didn’t get it”. Roger Stern then utterly demolished that in the pages of Back Issue(anyone reading this should pick up that issue and enjoy the sight of Peter David squirming in response), to which you whimpered with “I still maintain it was the best I could do under combat conditions”. Too bad Roger didn’t tell you that the best sow’s ear you could produce under “combat” still isn’t ever going to be a silk purse no matter how you spin it later.

        If that wasn’t bad enough, you later admitted that the book was executed poorly, but it was all Alan Kupperberg’s fault. To be accurate, you referred to him as “the artist”, but it’s difficult to think who else you could have meant. What the hëll did Kupperberg do to deserve being thrown under your ego-protection bus?

        And you did a hëll of a lot more than complain about Captain marvel’s price raise. You actually demanded that other books like X-Men be marked up to subsidize your poor seller. Did it ever occur to you for a second that the remaining readers of Captain Marvel were reading at least some X-books as well, so they’d get screwed by your demand anyway? Again, Owsley/Priest wrote in to give you a well-deserved thumping(which you wisely didn’t attempt to refute). If that wasn’t bad enough, you later wrote that your efforts weren’t receiving support from any other professionals in the industry. That’s because everyone else BUT you realized how foolish you were being, and your head was wedged too far up your own ášš to realize it!

        Worst of all, at the very end, Quesada(and presumable Jemas) warned you never to trash Marvel again or it’d be your ášš on the curb for good. What did you do afterwards? You wrote “I don’t respond well to threats”. Oh. REALLY. What were you intending to do? Smite Joe & Bill with your Mighty Peter Power? Do you have any idea how much like a pouty 4-year-old you came off like?

        As I remarked before, those are examples off the top of my head of why so many people hold you as one of the most hated people in comics. Do you want to hear more? And people not being able to stand you is ABSOLUTELY germane to this. That guy did indeed say he was a fan of yours–emphasis on “was”–until you foolishly pìššëd him off and drove him away. You didn’t pay any mind to that last bit, did you?

        You’ve done this thing over and over and over and over again during the last few decades, and the chickens started coming home to roost some years ago. You got ignored by editors, causing you to resort to self-publishing–and as you pointed out in some posts a little while, editors still routinely ignore you–and you can’t figure out why. The last volume of X-Factor, the title that arguably comes up second when your name is mentioned, is cancelled after less than two measly years and you can’t figure out why. Websites don’t make any attempt to confirm rumors with you, and you can’t figure out why. Folks on chat rooms refuse to treat you with Kingly Deference until you get huffy and leave, and you can’t figure out why.

        Well, one simple reason answers Why: BECAUSE THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WHO ONCE LOVED YOU NOW HATE YOUR FRIGGIN’ GUTS BECAUSE OF YOUR OWN BEHAVIOR. That’s why.

        But that’s not going to make any impression on you, is it? No, you’ve decided that you are PAD, Writer with a Capital W, and any criticism of things you actually said and wrote MUST be “pretend”.

        Matt Dow: I’m not in the habit of confronting anyone at conventions about anything; that’s the kind of behavior I associate with drunken sports fans. Now, when you hear me say Toilet Paper, that’s when you can roll out. Got it?

      3. Oh, I don’t claim to have been the only person to discern the mediocrity that was Peanuts in its later years. For instance, there’s this guy, whom you could trash if you want:

        http://kotaku.com/how-snoopy-killed-peanuts-1724269473

        And then there’s this guy, who disliked the recent movie–which I thought was quite charming–because he couldn’t stand Charlie Brown:

        http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2015/11/02/peanuts-movie-review-i-really-didnt-like-your-movie-charlie-brown/#634e9c17b97e

        Are there other places where you can find people adoring Peanuts? Sure. Opinions are going to differ. The point is, you’re making it sound as if I danced on Schulz’s grave, and not only are you wrong, you’re quite simply nuts. Comparing it to my attacking the guy on the Internet for going after Zelazny is flat out insane. Zelazny had just died and that numb nut said he was glad–genuinely GLAD–because he didn’t like Zelazny’s work. By contrast, my column saw print two years after Schulz’s passing. To assert, as you seem to be doing, that someone is forever immune from having their work critiqued after they die is coo coo.

        The rest of your stuff is equally off base. I don’t care what Owsley’s recollection of the Hobgoblin was: it happened exactly the way I said it did. Was I not thrilled with Kupperberg’s work? No, I wasn’t. I thought the story took a downward turn when he started drawing it. But that’s the way it goes in comics. Some artists elevate the work, and some bring it down.

        And I didn’t “demand” anything of Joe and Bill. I suggested alternatives, period. Your consistent hatred for me is deliriously distorting your perceptions of anything I’ve ever done or said, and all you’re doing is embarrassing yourself.

        PAD

      4. Just to bring in a smidge of sanity here, he wrote that piece on Peanuts two years after Charles Schulz died. It’s not like the man died and Peter immediately started trashing him. In fact, he didn’t trash him at all, he merely critiqued his work. He didn’t express pleasure at his death, so your Roger Zelazny analogy is absurd.

        And also, Peanuts is mediocre.

  7. This is a world where actual supposed news agencies ran with the story that a gay caveman’s grave had been found by archeologists as well as the story that smelling farts helps prevent cancer. Neither story was true, and both represented a gross mischaracterization of what was in the papers released by the archeologists and scientists.

    This is a world where we have a mass shooting incident and there are easily ten “news” sites publishing inaccurate information for days, weeks, and even months afterwards for every one trying to get it right. This is a world where- even dealing with major issues that could have serious impact on all of our lives -the further down the rungs of the journalistic ladder you get the more you encounter the “journalism standard” of “If I like what it say it must be true!”

    This is a world where the race to be first to the net with a scoop means regular retractions on news stories and death announcements.

    I know it’s got to be a pain in your ášš when the stories involve you or your work, but it unfortunately can’t be much of a surprise these days. Still, despite how far so much of the “news” media out there has fallen, getting pìššëd at you because they got it wrong has got to rank up there with the lowest of the low for genre journalism standards.

    It’s also got to be a great example of just how stupid this guy is. I’m in his position and I screw that up? First I apologize, but then I try to take advantage of the fact that we;re communicating on the issue to get you officially on record on the issue itself as well as some additional related bits for the article to replace the screwed up info one. Even if you refuse that, I pull the old piece and replace it with a piece stating that you contacted me to dispel the inaccurate rumors and stated that the best thing fans can do is keep watching, keep letting it be known that there’s demand.

    I’d see that as common sense. I guess this guy has even less of that than he has professionalism.

  8. Sadly, most online “news” sites can’t even *spell* “journalistic integrity” (at least, judging by everything else they have a hard time spelling).
    .
    It’s all about getting clicks to raise the ad revenue. Who cares if it’s true or not?

  9. The only thing that’s embarrassing here is your persistent attempts to minimize your own crap.

    You didn’t qualify your statement on “discovered mediocrity” to strictly Schulz’ later work; you applied it to the entirety of the strip! I can only imagine what your thought processes were: “I don’t think these Peanuts strips are as funny as they were when I first read them. The logical answer to that is…Charles Schulz was a mediocre talent all along! After all, it’s not like I, Peter David, a writer with a capital W, could have perceptions that are less than impeccable!” And don’t try to obfuscate with somebody else’s dislike of the movie; Schulz had nothing to do with how the filmmakers handled the characters. It isn’t necessary for you to dance on Schulz’ grave to deserve criticism. Any differences between you and the Zelazny-basher can be measured on the head of a pin and still have plenty of pin left over. The fact that your column came two years after Schulz’ death doesn’t absolve you of anything. Those CBG letter writers–including some comics professionals–agreed with that. Were they all off base as well?

    Owsley’s recollections aren’t the same as yours; therefore they’re to be dismissed? What makes your statements any more truthful than his? Because you say so? I notice you don’t make any attempt to dispute Stern’s remarks. You don’t dare try that with him, do you? And I honestly have to wonder whom you would have shifted blame to if Kupperberg had responded to your accusation while he was alive. The colorist? The inker? A production guy? Hëll, why not “Okay, this story is still receiving brickbats despite my best attempts…but none of you would have seen it if Stan Lee hadn’t agreed to publish it, so it’s HIS fault!”

    Don’t try to tell me you were merely “suggesting alternatives” to Joe and Bill. Are you in the habit of bemoaning the absence of support from the rest of the comics industry when your “suggestions” aren’t met, as you did then? And am I genuinely supposed to believe that you were threatened with the end of your career at Marvel just for “suggesting alternatives”? Plainly, you were doing much more than that.

    Maybe I should bring up more examples of your foolish behavior to more fully illustrate my claims. Should I remind you of your Sidney-Mellonesque “Who the Hëll is Len Rifas?” moment? Maybe I should remind folks of that strange albeit understated problem you had with Alan Moore when his “League of Extraordinary Gentlemen” was enthusiastically received, while your efforts on Captain Marvel and Supergirl were headed down the sales toilet?

    Robert Fuller: Oh, go back to reading your Cathy Guisewite collection.

    1. Uh…no. No, I didn’t apply it to the “entirety” of “Peanuts.” I was just referring to the strips that had been reprinted in the two years since Schulz had died. Those were of much more recent vintage. No idea when they were first produced, but my guess would be the eighties or nineties, and that was past the strip’s prime. In my opinion. And the opinions of others. Which I pointed out and you ignored. You ignored the guy who said basically the same thing that I did about the strip, and the criticism of Charlie Brown in the movie is absolutely on point because the movie CB was faithful to the strip. Nor was I trying to “absolve” myself of anything; simply point out that your comparison to Zelazny was poorly made. I mean, if you really want to believe that once someone dies, their work can never be criticized, you go right on believing that. But that’s nuts. And it’s sad that you can’t see that. And good heavens, people wrote in to CBG and disagreed with me? Horrors! That never happened except, y’know, all the time. I respect their right to have differing opinions, even if you don’t respect my right to have them.

      As for Owsley, I am not going to get into a back and forth with you about it, because Owsley gave me my first break into comics and I’m not going to diss him. So sorry: no ammunition for you to go running back to him so you can say, “Look what Peter David said about you!”

      And yes, I did risk my career. I know that because Joe called me and told me that I had risked my career until he realized I was using the same over-the-top, complain in public tactics that he and Jemas had come up with, and decided to launch “You-Decide” instead of just firing me. Which obviously worked out since I’m still there.

      You can bring up all the examples of my “foolish” behavior that you want, because we’re just talking about me and I love talking about me. And correcting your ludicrous examples while watching you melt down in public is honestly kind of entertaining.

      PAD

      1. I think Marmaduke is mediocre. Oh, sorry, didn’t mean to dance on Brad Anderson’s grave there! I also find mediocrity in lots of old books and movies and TV shows created by people who are no longer with us. Ðámņ, there I go again, dancing on graves! Somebody stop me!
        .
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QE4a5daxpPM

      2. It doesn’t surprise me that you love talking about yourself. Considering all the supporters and allies you’ve driven away with your Petty Tyrant behavior, it makes sense that the remaining guy you can rely on the most to talk about you is the one you see in the mirror.
        As for melting down…Mister, when you start seeing misspelled words and sentence construction worthy of Todd MacFarlane coming from me, then you’ll know I’m melting down. In the meantime, refer back to your spluttering, blubbering posts in the wake of that idiotic Spider-Man musical’s problems if you need entertaining.(You folks remember that, don’t you? That stupid Broadway production that, by all accounts, was going to take an Adam West-Batman approach to Spider-Man, which was the last thing any self-respecting comics person needed? You remember that utterly bizarre proprietary position Peter adopted towards it, culminating in that outright fit he threw when Entertainment Weekly mentioned bad reviews on the front cover? Now THAT was a meltdown like no down has ever melted before or since. Why, how dare those uppity Entertainment Weekly kulaks decide what to put on their own front cover without first consulting the Mighty Peter Favog!)
        I didn’t claim that there was anything unique or strange about CBG letter-writers criticizing you. I know dámņëd well it happened all the time. I stated that those writers had just as much a problem as I do with you declaring “mediocrity” in Schulz’ work two years after his death. Were all those writers off base as well? You completely ducked that question. I admit that that Zelazny-bashing dipshit displayed a bloodthirst that you’ve never been guilty of. The differences in your offensiveness are best measured by splitting a hair, though. And do you actually think that other judgments of “mediocrity” in Peanuts somehow validate yours? I could point to other people who believe that period showed an outright renewal in Schulz’ creativity(No, I’m not going to link you to them. Search them out yourself.) That movie critic’s dislike of Charlie Brown doesn’t back you up at all. I’ve got bad news for you: Schulz never intended Charlie Brown to be a 100% likable character. Schulz gave him a specific flaw, made crystal clear in a telling 1970s strip: Charlie is standing paralyzed while the little Red-Haired Girl is driven by her parents away from him yet again. Linus is in tow, but this time his patience finally runs out and he berates Charlie with “She’s gone, Charlie Brown! And you didn’t do anything! That’s your whole problem! YOU NEVER DO ANYTHING!” That’s not an indictment of Schulz–it shows his consummate skill in creating characters far more complex than they appear on the surface; far more complex than just about anyone else you see on the comics page. The fact that that critic is more struck with Charlie’s bad side doesn’t prove “mediocrity” at all. “These strips aren’t as funny as they were when I first read them. Therefore, mediocrity.” No, that’s MASTERY. Too bad for you that weren’t, and still aren’t, capable of recognizing it. To use terminology you inflicted on somebody else concerning that execrable Spirit film: Charles Schulz was an Eagle. You are an Ant. However, considering your admissions of lifelong poor eating habits–and the logical noxious digestive consequences–I could be persuaded that you’re a Stinkbug or a Dung Beetle. If anything is “sad” here, it’s that.
        You actually think I have an ulterior motive of setting up a “Let’s You And Him Fight” scenario with Owsley? Are you paranoid as well as foolish? No, I am not going to inform Owsley of anything. I do find it likely that some unnamed lurker–or lurkers–have already informed him of this argument(wherever he is) and he’s probably reading this now, rolling on the floor and laughing his head off at you. Erik Larsen and John Byrne have probably also been tipped off to this as well(Don’t repeat your earlier mistake of assuming I’m an ally of theirs just because I dropped their names. I’ve never posted on or registered with their sites.) I’ve noticed you’re no longer attempting to refute my charges of blame-shifting, though. You probably can’t.
        You seem to be confused about my statement about your near-firing at Marvel. I’m not referring to any warning Quesada gave you before U-Decide began–I’m referring to an admission you made in a BID column well after U-Decide was underway, if not concluded: that your career would go up in smoke if you ever badmouthed Marvel again in any way, shape, or form. The column where you pathetically whined “I don’t respond well to threats”, which closely followed another column where you utterly abased yourself before Joe & Bill and profusely apologized for pìššìņg them off. I could almost hear your teeth grinding in seething, powerless frustration while reading it.(I imagine you other people reading this have a collective blank look on your faces, wondering what I’m referring to. That’s because, unless you were reading CBG at the time, you’ve never seen those two columns. Why? Because those columns were never posted on this blog. The “Archive”*ahem* MYSTERIOUSLY RAN OUT BEFORE YOU COULD SEE THEM. I’m not making this up. Those two columns evidently galled Peter so much that he doesn’t want ANYBODY looking at them again. No, he’d sooner chew his own legs off before letting those things ever again see the light of day!) Why, how terrible that Peter David, Writer with a Capital W, should be buffaloed and ordered to forbear criticism by a-a-a-a-a mere ARTIST! Oh, that the Natural Order of Things should be inflicted with such an Abomination!

        And yes, I am going to bring up another example of your idiotic behavior. I don’t imagine the name of Len Rifas rings a bell with you. Well: back in the early stages of your feud with Todd MacFarlane, he produced an issue of Spawn featuring some cartoonish racists, one of which he named “Petey”. You took issue with this in your column. Shortly afterwards, a letter from Len Rifas appeared that, although not necessarily taking your side, did take Todd to task for his crudity.
        Len Rifas had been a comics pro for about 20 years at that point. He was literally the first to translate and publish Manga(specifically, Barefoot Gen) for American comics. He did this in 1973, while you were still stupidly lugging a guitar around in a foredoomed attempt to get High School Girls to treat you with anything other than well-deserved derision. He also founded EduComics, a well-respected provider of teaching comics. He did all this at considerable risk to his finances and well-being; I think he actually did lose his shirt once or twice. This man could have been a valuable ally for you in your various struggles. And exactly how did you respond to his letter?

        You wrote “WHO THE HÊLL IS LEN RIFAS?”

        As you replied to me in one of my earliest posts: Wow. What an áššhølë question.

        It only got worse. You took this utterly unfathomable position of lambasting him for his letter; apparently the way he criticized Todd didn’t meet your rarefied standards. Understandably, the man turned his back on you and doesn’t seem to have ever communicated with you again. What a way to pìšš øff and repulse a 20-year comics vet who could have been an ally of yours! Good show, Peter! Great job!

        But…maybe I’m being too harsh on you this time. After all, Len Rifas never wrote any Super-Hero comics, so he couldn’t have been THAT big a deal. Isn’t that the important thing, Sidney Mellon?

        (Yes, folks, I’m fully aware that Sidney Mellon was a fictional persona created by Gerard Jones and possibly his then-writing partner Will Jacobs. It’s a perfect fit regardless.)

        Robert Fuller: I don’t consider you to be anything more than an interchangeable PAD sidekick, so I’ll respond in a manner appropriate to your level of importance. I will use a dialect composed of roughly equal parts Tarzan, Bizarro, Sylvester Stallone, and the Flaming Carrot. *Ahem*

        Yo! No mouth. Mouth big not. Mouth big? Fist in teeth. Teeth go ow. Want ow teeth? Ut!

      3. I just want to see if I understand: you don’t like it when I criticize the work of someone who is dead. You don’t like it when I criticize the words of someone who is alive. You don’t like it when I say something negative. You don’t like it when I say something positive. You don’t seem to like it when I say anything at all. All you do is complain, incessantly. About everything that I’ve said. About things that I never remember saying. About things that any sane person would have no recollection of. And yet you seem to remember it all. You have a staggeringly encyclopedic knowledge of absolutely every single thing that this person you despise seems to have said.

        You don’t find this strange? You don’t find this odd? You don’t find this absolutely demented? This doesn’t seem to strike you at all as contradictory to the point of borderline insanity? The reason I’m asking is that everyone else here seems to see this for what it is. The only person who doesn’t is you. You seem to be oblivious to the fact that any sane and rational person, you were quite simply out of your mind. I totally mean this: you need to get some help. You need to sit down with someone professional and explain to them this demented hang up you have on the writings of this person whom you despise. I mean, there are people whose writing I don’t like. Generally, I ignore them. I don’t go to the website and harass them. I used to. I used to go online and pick fights with people like John Byrne or Erik Larsen. But I don’t really do that anymore. I grew out of it. I found that there were better things to do with my life.

        Now if you want to continue to come here and bìŧçh and piss and moan about things that I said 10 years ago and 15 years ago and 20 years ago, go right ahead. I’ll let you continue to sit here and waste God knows how long going on and on about things that I’ve said. But seriously, I really think that the words “get a life” have never been more aptly directed then right now. Seriously, I feel sorry for you.

        PAD

  10. Catching up with this, I’m reminded of an anecdote from Evan Dorkin that he ended up using in a strip, where an irate “former fan” confronted him, saying “I don’t know where you get off criticizing Stan Lee. He’s done more for comics than you EVER will!” and his reply was “Then by YOUR logic, you should be shutting up right about… now.”

      1. So, then answer me this…
        .
        Why the frell do you care so much? Why do you have so many freakin’ anecdotes of all the bad stuff he’s said and done ready to hand? Why are you wasting so much of your time on the blog of somebody whom you claim to have never been a fan?

      2. I prefer showers, but thanks.

        So, if you’ve never been a fan, then… why are you even here? Why are you even bothering? Why does it raise your hackles so much? Is PAD’s continued existence somehow affecting your paycheck, or your lifestyle that you feel the need to lash out?

        No, I get it… You think you’re “taking down” someone for the good of whatever collective you came from, who you feel he insulted. This kind of blind hatred doesn’t form in a vacuum; you feel personally slighted somehow for you to systematically categorize every little perceived slight or insult. The link to the overly entitled whiners of Scans Daily is a natural assumption to have made, since you’re following the exact same attack pattern as they did.

        If you somehow feel that this is going to be “it”, your “internet claim to fame” that you “took on that petty Tyrant Peter David”, well, in the real world that will count for… well pretty much nothing. If it keeps you warm and fuzzy at night to continue with the attacks, more power to you. Outside of your own ego-feeding, you accomplish exactly nothing.

  11. Well, as much as I enjoy reading the back and forth between PAD and what’s-his-face, to get to the point of the blog :
    Yeah. Journalistic integrity is pretty much gone the way of the Dodo. Growing up in a newspaper, I keep an eye on journalism.
    I will say I think Anderson Cooper tries… I just miss Tim Russert.
    But, if people get their news from Social Media or other blogs, then those blogs need to be just as responsible as a newspaper reporter. (Kids… newspapers were where people got their news before the internet. They were printed on Paper. They’re on their way following Journalistic Integrity)
    TAC

  12. A few years ago, I took a break from this site. Reasons aren’t important. A couple years ago, I came back to see if things had changed. They seemed to, so I hung around for a while. Then I would make posts, see them hit the screen, and then disappear. They were being “reviewed”, I was told.

    Sorry, I’m not seeing much journalistic integrity here if my comments about Spider-Man in CA: Civil War get dropped but your war of the words with the ScansDaily douche is suitable family fair.

    I still respect you as an author and writer of stuff, and I wouldn’t expect this decision to have any effect on your income. And I look forward to your taking 15 minutes and bringing Bruce Banner back to life.

    I’ll check back in a couple of years.

    –Ed

    1. I honestly have no idea what you’re referring to. If you were just making comments about Civil War, there would be no reason to drop them. As for your comments being reviewed, that’s often automatic. MY posts get held for review. No idea why; it seems arbitrary .

      1. Well, I do think criticizing the work of a dead creator is a bad idea that typically backfires. After all, the dead can’t defend themselves. I think criticizing the words of the still-living Len Rifas was extremely stupid of you. Saying something negative? Nah, not always. Saying something positive? When did I thump you for that? Do you think “That is mediocre” is something positive?

        There’s one thing that truly pìššëš me off: people who try to rewrite their own history to make themselves look better. In your case, it comes in the form of pretending to have never driven people away or just plain angering them by behaving like a Petty Tyrant, and professing surprise or ignorance when folks won’t lift a finger to help you later. To clarify terms, “Petty Tyrant” is derived from Castaneda and refers to anyone who has a tiny bit of power and influence and then proceeds to misuse it on people that that person has no business misusing it on. That description fits you to a T, or more accurately a P.T. You’ve been doing this so often and so long that I don’t think have any clue when you’re doing it.

        Not that I think that’ll make any impression on you. No, you’ve decided that I’m mentally ill, and therefore enabled yourself to dismiss everything I’ve said. Only a Juke or a Kallikak or a Tooney Lune would ever hold Peter David’s feet to the fire, huh?

        Nevertheless, I’ll make another stab at it. Look at this very thread. I didn’t expect anyone here to rush to my side, and I was not disappointed. How many folks here made the effort to defend you, though?

        Seven.

        That’s it. Seven. SEVEN. Count ’em. It didn’t use to be that way, did it? No, you had friggin’ Legions of supporters and people who just wanted to be in your presence. Your convention areas actually had to be ROPED OFF to stave off crowding, for fûçk’s sake! If someone like me had taken you to task for, well, ANYTHING back then, you could have counted on at least a few dozen admirers to come to your defense. You wouldn’t even have had to snap your fingers.

        As of now, as I write this, you’ve got seven. Where, where, where did the rest all go?

        YOU PÍSSÊÐ THEM ALL OFF WITH PETTY TYRANT BEHAVIOR AND DROVE THEM AWAY. That’s what happened.

        You are correct about my memory. You weren’t convinced of that when I first mentioned that to you, were you? You know better now. If you want to call it strange, odd, or demented, knock yourself out. I’m proud of it and I revel in it. Yes, I do have a life. Forty-hour job, all the overtime I can handle. Do you think I take all day to construct these responses? Uh uh. For example, my prior post–the whopping huge one–took a total of less than half an hour from the time I finished reading your prior post to my last keystroke. It only took that long because I’m not a speed typist. When you’ve got the memory I have, you can do things like that. And it feels GREAT.

        You’ll never know that. I wouldn’t guess how long it takes you to compose anything, but I suspect it’s considerably longer. The memory just ain’t there.

        I think this does cause me to make a repeated mistake; I tend to expect folks to remember things as well as I do. I get disappointed when they don’t–as disappointed as I was with your last reply. You didn’t even attempt to refute any of the facts I put forth, probably because you just weren’t capable of doing so. Those facts were taken from your own writing! Your own words! (You folks reading this don’t have to take my word for it. You can verify Peter’s words by checking out those BID columns yourselves. Or maybe you won’t be able to–I rather sense that Peter would prefer that nobody ever read them again. Self-preservation, don’t you know.)And what did you do? You resorted to one of your old face-saving tactics that you employ when you can’t out-argue somebody on facts: you question their sanity. I suppose I’m lucky you didn’t proclaim me a Bully Who Is Mean To You, your other tactic(which you probably don’t remember, either).

        Upon reflection, I think I truly did overestimate your ability to defend yourself. Your memory was comparable to a leaky water pail before 2013,and that stroke must have taken a Hëll of a lot more out of you.(I can’t have that much sympathy for what happened to you,though–after a long career of calling other people stupid, it doesn’t dawn on you that morbid obesity and a 56-year-old body is a lethal combination? Did no physician ever warn you of that? If so, did you listen at all–or did you declare them mentally ill bullies as well?)

        It truly must be Hëll to be a 60-year-old man with the memory of someone who’s 80. I honestly can’t grasp how anyone could live their life not being able to remember huge chunks of it. If it was me, I’d probably have a stro–uh, you know.

        So now you have some clue what it was like for those less coherent people you used to criticize. Doesn’t feel good, does it?

        Oh, who am I kidding? You won’t retain any of this. I’m the one who feels sorry here–for you.

        Would it make you feel any better to find out that I’m an old Comics Journal guy, or one of the more intelligent Wizard guys? Neither would be true, but…

      2. Actually, Jack, no one here is actually defending him as there’s no need.
        .
        One person made a point of correcting the facts in how you compared two events. Several of us have simply ridiculed you since you’re acting like a world class idiot.
        .
        “Well, I do think criticizing the work of a dead creator is a bad idea that typically backfires. After all, the dead can’t defend themselves.”
        .
        Yet everyone does all the time and it’s hardly something that backfires. People put together “Looking Back at…” columns and programs all the time where they look at a specific creator, a specific genre, or a specific era. More than a few people are critical of dead creators, actors, or whatever else in those.
        .
        Hëll, Orson Welles was (and still is really) a hugely respected actor and creator. More than a few people- fans and film pros alike -have said his later work was less than spectacular. He phoned it in a few times and visibly tired of acting while still doing it.
        .
        Here’s the simple truth- Charles Schulz did some great work. But in the later years, his work was of far lesser quality than than in his earlier years. Perhaps the weakness in his later work is more noticeable in the era of collected volumes, but it is an observation made by many.
        .
        Hëll, I love Peter Sellers. Loved his pre-filmwork Goon Show stuff, loved many of his films. Just because he’s dead I’m not going to not say he turned in a few performances that were less well done than his other work.
        .
        I have every right to make that observation.
        .
        Various fans have every right to make that observation.
        .
        Various critics have every right to make that observation.
        .
        Peter has the right to make that observation.
        .
        It’s called expressing one’s opinion. You’re expressing your opinion here, and it’s your right to do so. It’s also our right to laugh at you over what an ášš you’re making of yourself.
        .
        “Where, where, where did the rest all go?”
        .
        Assumption based on bias is no proof of fact. Where did they all go?
        .
        Making purely a guess, but a more accurate one than yours I’m sure, activity on the blog reduced when Peter started posting less after his health issues. Without the more regular posts to spark interaction, some drifted away or at least reduced how often they looked in on the blog.
        .
        And I know I can say this with some level of accuracy because of who used to comment here with regularity. A number of us started communicating with each other off the blog long before his health issues hit, and I’m now friends with a bunch of those guys- even to the point of some of us visiting each other and hanging out for entire weekends. It’s a sizable chunk of the old crew that I still see or communicate with from time to time, and none of them reduced their presence here for the reasons you outline in your rant. Hëll, one of them is thrilled that he finally gets to meet Peter face to face and shake his hand this coming weekend.
        .
        And the fan at conventions thing? Where did they all go?
        .
        I’m about to see Peter at a major convention where year after year he talks to packed rooms as one of several panelists or as a solo act. Much like your version of how he critiqued Charles Schulz’s later work was just the same as the guy who expressed happiness that Roger Zelazny died was wildly off the mark and at odds with the reality based community, your statements as to the cause of these matters as seen through the lens of your own bias and idiocy is equally flawed.
        .
        Besides, isn’t it time you come clean here? Admit it, you acted like an ášš in the past. Maybe it was here, maybe it was another website, and likely it was using a different name. And when you did, you got burned and embarrassed.
        .
        That’s how you come across. A butt-hurt idiot who has been nursing a grudge and thinks he has an opportunity at last to grind his axe. Seriously, your recounting these supposed wrongs makes you come across more like an angry teenager who is upset at the girl who dumped him than it makes you come across as a sane adult.
        .
        Go do something productive. Get a life. Find something you enjoy other than making yourself look like a dimwitted, petty troll looking to settle the score for having gotten your ášš handed to you in the past. It’ll be good for you.

      3. And, frankly, you still come across like the latest repeat visit from Ben Bradley/fake Dan Taylor/troll of 100 names. He wasn’t very interest in facts or truth either. Nor was he particularly bright.

      4. Since my health seems so important to you, I’d be happy to discuss it.

        Yes, I absolutely knew that being morbidly obese was a contribution to my stroke, but I was unable to lose weight. I went to a nutritionist and her advice turned out to be useless. Indeed, my body was so screwed up that when I was in the recovery center and they had me on a strict 1500-2000 calorie a day diet, I wound up gaining weight. They accused me of cheating, which was insane since all I had to eat was the food they provided me.

        But in recent months I found a nutritionist who was able to discern what my problems were. It turns out that according to him, back when I had pneumonia some years ago, the steroids that my doctor put me on screwed up my body chemistry and my body became convinced that I was in starvation mode, and so refused to burn calories. That’s why everything I was doing at the time–eating differently, exercising–stopped working and all the weight I had lost to that point came back. Now, though, I’m working with him, eating differently, and weight is finally coming off. And when I posted about that on this site, everyone congratulated me.

        Everyone except you. You started yelling at me. You were the only one to make snide remarks. I said something positive and you launched into attack mode. Which is where you’ve been ever since.

        And as others have pointed out, at this point you have made zero attempt to address the original comment that started this whole thing: a shoddy journalist who made no attempt to check the facts of his story. Again: a guy who was a fan of mine. Whether my subsequent scolding of him for his poor journalism now make him hate me is irrelevant; it does nothing to mitigate the fact that he screwed up in the first place, and is only one example of the steady decline of journalistic integrity in this country. My popularity and whether people dislike me is completely immaterial. But that doesn’t matter to you. You seem to think that I had it coming because I had no idea who Len Rifas was. Which isn’t that surprising considering neither does the Internet. I did a fast google search and came up with a couple of passing references to him but no bio, no list of credits, no web page, no nothing. Do you have any idea how obscure you are in this industry when even the Internet has almost no trace of you?

        Yes, there seem to be fewer people commenting here than in the old days. Back when I wasn’t on Twitter or Facebook. Now I am and there is plenty of activity in those locations. There’s just a ton of competition, that’s all. You could easily go on a rant about how there are far fewer people buying comic books or watching network television and declare that it’s because comic books or network TV has done things to drive them away. Which they may well have; but there’s also lots of cheaper entertainment competing for comic book dollars and several hundred cable channels except for just three networks. There’s lots to do out there.

        So, again, your obsession with me, while certainly providing entertainment value, has done nothing except (a) cede my initial point uncontested and (b) prove to everyone reading this that you’re nuts. I’m not sure that was your intention.

        PAD

  13. Nah, Peanuts isn’t mediocre. SOME of Peanuts is mediocre, particularly in it’s last 15 years. Heck, the same dude wrote and drew each and every strip for 50 years. They ain’t all gonna be gems. It’s actually a bigger accomplishment that, while sometimes mediocre, it was never bad. Not always great, but never bad. There aren’t too many cartoonists who had his work ethic or his track record.

    Sorry, though, that strayed from the point. Riegel, the simple fact that you’re willing to spill so much electronic ink over what you imagine are Mr.David’s offenses just demonstrates that you need to get a life.

    As to the printing of unsubstantiated rumor: when it’s so easy to find confirmation, I certainly don’t get it. Otherwise, it may only be because I see it done so often on the internet, but I don’t have much problem with it so long as it’s labeled as such. Though I do find myself frequently asking “Is this based on something, or is someone just wishing?” (like the rumor that Scott Eastwood was gonna play Nightwing in Suicide Squad, which was apparently just people wishing, based on the fact that his character was unidentified in most cast lists).

    1. Oh, I’ve got a life. And one hëll of a long memory. Too long for Peter, unfortunately.

  14. The more this dipshit rants and drools out his idiocy, the more he starts to write like Ben Bradley/fake Dan Taylor/troll of 100 names.
    .
    Or he’s just an idiot who has no life. Well, so was Ben.
    .
    Jack, dude, seriously… We’re adults here. No one is impressed that you’re trying to trying to troll the page. No one is impressed that you’re trying to “feud” with a pro. Go do something useful with your life.
    .
    Peter,
    .
    See you next weekend in Atlanta. I’ll even be dragging Bill Mulligan along with me. Finally talked him into going to Dragon Con. Granted, it was largely with the help of the horror track director.
    .
    Anyone else that’s going- Come by the Blind Dead panel Sunday night in the horror track and say hi. Bill & I along with Horror News Radio’s Doc Rotten and the Horror Track Director will be discussing that great cult classic horror franchises from the 1970s.

    1. Gee, Jerry. I feel really bad. I don’t want you to be unimpressed. This advice may help out: Find a good, comfortable chair. Place it in a nice, private corner, preferably away from any windows. Sit down and Impress yourself until your hand goes numb or you’re dehydrated, whichever comes first. Happy Ending, er, Impressing!

      1. Believe it or not, Jerry, I’ve never entered into any conflicts with Peter before this. Neither am I this Ben Bradley person(That’s the second time you’ve dropped his name…that guy really got under your skin, I suppose). I do have a life, and I do a productive thing: I work for an organization that solicits and collects blood donations for people who need it, and have been doing so for years. Very likely my work has saved at least a few lives. But I had the SHEER AUDACITY to hold Peter David’s feet to the flames, so I guess that’s immaterial.

        Now, I’ve seen some of your old posts, and you’re a…security guard? Detective? Police Officer? If so, don’t you have some unarmed minorities to shoot? Then, I can call folks up and ask them to donate blood to the poor guy. Isn’t it cool how these things just dovetail?

      2. My, you have been lurking for a long time then. Or rather you were posting under a different name when you were getting made to look like a pants on head idiot here before. Either way.

      3. I’m pretty sure his name really is Jack Riegel. A fast check around reveals a Jack Riegel in St. Louis whose job is basically what he says his is, so that’s probably him. And let’s be fair: it’s nice that he saves lives. Believe it or not, apparently I have on a number of occasions as well. People have come to me and said that my writing was a life saving experience for them: stories I’ve told or the way I’ve handled characters helped them through difficult periods that they say they would not have gotten through otherwise. I’m always incredibly flattered on the occasions people say stuff like that.

        Granted, his obsession with me remains incomprehensible. I’m sure there’s something he’s not saying. One simply cannot get that insanely upset about something I said about some comic book guy decades ago who was such an apparent non-entity that there’s pretty much no trace of him on the Internet. He “dropped out” before the Internet showed up? The Internet has been around since the mid-1980s and the column I allegedly wrote was at least a decade after that. So whatever I may or may not have said, Who the Hëll is he? is certainly a legitimate question.

        But, y’know, whatever. His obsession with me is so absolute that it doesn’t matter that it makes no sense. His latest claim that it’s all relevant to the recent business with the “journalist” who got his story wrong is absurd because he’s been at this for months; it’s only just now that I’ve let him ramble on, hanging himself as he does so. The level of his insults is also deteriorating. Accusing you of killing people, implying that I have problems with personal hygiene: It’s middle school level insults at best. I mean, I’m not expecting Henny Youngman, but this is just sad.

        PAD

      4. You obviously didn’t read too hard. Shooting minorities? Jerry’s a cop but he’s also a white-guilt progressive from the old school. Your insult doesn’t stick. Try tossing it at PAD’s conservative readers next time. Mind you, unless you get one that’s actually enthusiastic about Trump, it won’t stick either, but at least half the readers here won’t think you’re a moron.

      5. White-guilt???
        .
        Dude, I may not shoot minorities for the hëll of it, but I’m not one of those guys either.

  15. You don’t understand the point of publishing unsubstantiated rumors?

    Click through, with the resulting ad revenue. Nothing more. Anything that will get people to click to see what the latest news might be (or might not), that’s all that counts. This isn’t journalism, it’s money making schemes.

  16. Just so I understand what’s going on here, Peter is complaining that folks have reported a rumor without verifying it with Peter himself, and Jack (who insists he’s not with Scans Daily) Riegel appears to be saying, ‘Maybe it’s because of Scans Daily, but here’s a whole bunch of other things you’ve been an áššhølë and a hypocrite about!’ At the risk of invoking Jack (not with Scans Daily) Reigel’s wrath, can I just say, what does that do with the price of team in China? I notice that neither Jack (not with Scans Daily) nor anybody else is debating Peter’s original point, which is that these so-called journalists have printed these rumors without verifying them. In saying, ‘Yes, but here’s why…’ you have basically ceded the argument to Peter and continued on down some dusky side road, miles away from the original discussion. Continue to blast away at Peter if you will, but he and I (and I’m sure there are a few other writers and journalists involved in the above discussion as well) are aware that his original point remains uncontested. The rest is just sound and fury signifying, from what I can see here, nothing.

    1. Oh, I’m not interested if self-proclaimed journalists are following Peter David’s rules. It was interesting to hear about that one getting thoroughly pìššëd at him though. Yet another supporter he’s driven away…

    1. My tastes are generally considered nerdish by society at large, yes. So must yours, or you’d never know who Peter David is to begin with. What can I say? I don’t care for sports.

      1. Me commenting on “angry nerd psychopaths” = I have some sort of problem with all nerds
        .
        Logic in the Riegelverse

      2. I can’t fathom how you got “Jack Riegel thinks Robert Fuller has a problem with all nerds” out of that post. Anyway, how’s the brush business treating you?

  17. Peter, as I said to Joe Nazzaro, I have no interest in whether or not that guy obeyed your rules for journalism. His reaction after you tried to be a Petty Tyrant to him is what interested me.

    So Len Rifas wound down his comics career and apparently became a completely private citizen before Internet archiving really got going. That doesn’t excuse your horrendous ignorance, nor that Sidney Mellonish “WHO THE HÊLL IS LEN RIFAS?” you assaulted him with.

    Have I wasted my time with you? Mm. I suppose what I’ve done is comparable to telling a šhìŧŧÿ-šmëllìņg obese guy that he smells bad, and actually expecting him to go to a bathroom or his hotel room to clean himself up. That never actually does happen, does it?

    That last statement didn’t hit too close to home, did it?

    1. “Peter, as I said to Joe Nazzaro, I have no interest in whether or not that guy obeyed your rules for journalism. His reaction after you tried to be a Petty Tyrant to him is what interested me.”
      .
      Isn’t that an interesting way to define “Petty Tyrant” that “Jack” has developed? If someone gets something horrendously wrong and you try to correct the record, you’re a “Petty Tyrant” in his book.
      .
      I have a feeling “Jack” sees a lot of people out there as “Petty Tyrants” in his life. If this thread is any indication, his life is filled with many “Petty Tyrants” likely correcting him on a daily basis.

      1. Yes, Jerry, I have looked around this site for a while. This one, Newsarama, CBR, Byrne’s site, others. Problem?

        No, I haven’t posted here before this year.

        As I told Peter, “Petty Tyrant” comes from Castaneda. It is possible to be a Petty Tyrant while correcting(or, as is more often the case with Peter David, attempting to enforce arbitrary self-created rules)someone. It’s also possible to correct withOUT being one. Since Peter admitted that guy was a fan of his before, and no longer a fan afterwards, and considering Peter’s description of his communication with him, it’s obvious Peter took the Petty Tyrant route.

        Do I see many people as Petty Tyrants? Well, I certainly read news stories about them. In person…well, I’m six-foot-four, weigh 230 lbs, been lifting weights for 20 years, and have hair down to my backside. Curiously, I don’t receive many corrections about anything. They certainly aren’t delivered in Petty Tyrant manner when I do get them.

        You didn’t accuse me of being Ben Bradley this time. You’re slipping.

    2. You are coming across as a loon.

      I realize nothing anyone says will convince you of that but there you go.

      If I were a suspicious sort, prone to conspiracies, I would suspect you were a writing exercise made by PAD himself, for giggles and/or to make people post kind comments because it’s hard to imagine even most of the real hardcore PAD haters wanting to be on your side. I myself have disagreed with PAD on a number of things but if I thought that put me on the side with Mr. Riegel, yikes. Alas, Occam’s Razor dictates we take the far far more likely scenario of Just Another Nut.

      You sound…unhinged. Nobody is this emotionally invested in something as small as what you let on. What, exactly, set you on this path?

      (I would vote for him being the Scans Daily fanatic he denies being. It’s the first thing he went for. Yes he denies it, but, you know, reality.)

    3. Don’t think it hit to close to home for PAD, more than likely hits too close to home for yourself though considering how bad self-righteous nerd-rage stinks.

      Seriously though, I haven’t commented here in years, but many of us from the old days still lurk by and read the goings on when PAD posts here. And we also follow the goings on FB or Twitter.

      You (Jack Riegel), sound like a crazy person. You’ve been piling up grudges from perceived slights by PAD against you, and others that you are fan of, for apparently more than a decade. Most people don’t do that. Most people let go of things over time and don’t hold everything in, tallying up slights real and imagined. You know who doesn’t do that? Crazy people.

      Heck, most non-crazy people realize that most other people, like Len Rifas, can defend themselves if they do infact feel the need to. Which, since he hasn’t, pretty much makes the point that he doesn’t.

      Get some help. Seriously.

      1. *crap* last line of 3rd paragraph should read…
        You know who does do that? Crazy people.

        Stupid typos.

      2. Cisco, as I’ve said before, I’ve never been in a confrontation with Peter David before, nor have I posted here before this year. There are no old perceived slights against me. Other people, though…for example, unless Peter was wildly exaggerating how angry the self-appointed journalist was at him, I think we can agree that wasn’t a “perceived” slight. I’d probably take your comments more seriously if you posted under your real name.

      3. Uh, no, he was referring to “perceived slights” against you and others. As in, things that you perceive as slights, the number of which are seemingly monumental and seriously deranged. That’s what he’s saying. I know you have difficulty staying on track; I suspect ADD. But do try to keep up. Hard for you, I know, since everyone here is three steps ahead, but give it some effort.

        PAD

      4. I have no idea where you are getting the name Cisco. I posted using my initials, a fairly common practice. But the C isn’t for Cisco, its for Clay.

        PAD understood what i meant. I shouldn’t be surprised that your crazy ášš self didn’t. Anyway, you aren’t coming across as a sane person, you are coming across as an extremely hostile person with an idiotic vendetta.

        Something about your insane screed and the way you carry-on about these “slights” seems awfully familiar to me. The tallying and listing, and especially the insane claim of it not being personal, but it obviously being extremely personal. It brings back memories of my old X-fan/Comix-fan moderating days, and another crazy person with similar issues. But then crazy often just sounds like crazy.

        But whatever, I don’t really care if you take me seriously or not. Its no skin off my back either way.

  18. I must say, this thread has been pretty entertaining. But as these things go, enough is enough.
    Look, the funny thing is, I almost get where Jack is coming from. I’ve been a huge PAD fan since the early 90s but, from time to time, things he’s said has grated on me. Certain attitudes he’s seemingly copped rubbed me the wrong way.
    But…who the heck cares? What I am other than a fan of his work? I choose to come here, or not. I choose to buy his work, or not. I choose whether to believe in my head that he’d be a nice guy to have a beer with, or not.
    So I almost understand, at least in a general sense, what Jack is talking about. But the sheer amount of hate just doesn’t seem rational. Or healthy. Is he a jilted ex-lover? I don’t understand.
    As I said earlier, as both a fan and someone who hasn’t liked things PAD has said/done from time to time, I’m still an adult who can separate my feelings. I don’t buy his comics work anymore because he doesn’t write comics that I’m interested in, not because of his attitude or my perception of it.
    I do buy his novels and I generally love them.
    Look, it’s great to feel like you have a connection to an artist or author. And with this blog, and his old column, and articles…well, it’s easy to have a connection, good or bad, with PAD. But to take it upon yourself to teach him a lesson, or try to humiliate him, or send hate messages…that’s where my loose understanding of what he’s doing falls apart.
    I get why he might be upset with him. But why do you feel like calling him out is your torch to carry?
    I get the disappointment when you think your “hero has fallen”. And PAD must have been a hero to Jack at some point to generate this much hate.
    My advice? Go read the newest Sir Apropos of Nothing installment and stay off this board. What you’re doing is a real bad look.
    And just to clarify, while I said I do have a loose understanding behind what Jack is saying, most of his examples are laughably bad. Not to mention if you say, “I have unhealthy amounts of anger toward an author because I don’t think he’s a nice guy” out loud, you should find it’s a really, really silly thing to say.

    1. Tom, I’m not a fan of Peter David. I never have been. I have never had a “connection” to him, much less thought of him as a hero.

  19. Peter, I’m not that Jack Riegel. So you finally did a search on me? Didn’t find much, did you? Believe it or not, you’re the only comics creator–in fact, the only human being–I’ve been disgusted enough to be moved to post about.

    You’ve obviously had some difficulty believing that Jack Riegel is my real name. Judging from comments by Jerry Chandler and others, I’m guessing your site is much, much more prone to folks messing with you under phony names than–well, pretty much any other comics person. You tend to pìšš øff a rather large number of people, don’t you?

    Bill Mulligan mentioned the possibility of you doing some intellectual exercise for the purpose of, among other things, getting others to post kind words for you. Have you actually done this, or was he blowing smoke? Do you need support that badly that you’d do this?

    That “comics guy” is just ONE example of your idiotic behavior. There was nothing “alleged” about your column.I listed others. You’ve forgotten them already?

    You probably have. Like I said before, it can’t be good to be a 60-year-old man with the memory of somebody in his 80s. It’s only going to get worse for you. Good lord, how much will be left in your skull when you’re 70? Or 65? And considering how you’ve mishandled your own body for so dámņ long, how quickly are you going to need someone like Jerry Chandler to lead you around at conventions?

    You’ve decided that I’m mentally ill. I suppose it’s better for you to do that then to confront the fact that you couldn’t remember most of the things I charged you with. All those people you’ve pìššëd øff, driven away, subjected to Petty Tyrant behavior–they’re all going to still be here enjoying themselves in 10 years. You’re going to have trouble just taking basic care of yourself.

    But what do I know? I’m just a loon.

    By the way, when you had your stroke, did you fill your pants with a sea of šhìŧ?

    (No, I’m not that guy either. I heard about that from you. But, believe whatever makes you feel better.)

      1. Chalker? No.

        You folks truly need to believe that I’m an old poster/disgruntled fan, don’t you? Is the alternative really beyond your belief?

      2. The alternative is hard to believe because you’ve apparently decided to hate PAD enough to learn everything there is no to know about him even to the point of getting minor fan boy references that only regular readers of his CBG column would get.
        .
        Thinking you’re a disgruntled fan is giving you the benefit of the doubt, because the alternative is a truly creepy thing.

    1. Well, I definitely do believe you’re insane. You are continuing to fabricate things. I never said that I doubted what your real name was. Indeed, I’m the one who told Jerry that I thought the name you presented was genuine.I find it interesting that you are accusing me of having memory issues considering you seem to display the inability to recall things were said in this thread a day or so ago.

      Here is the thing that I really do not understand. Why is it that you do not seem to comprehend what the entire purpose of being on the Internet is: to convince others of your point of view. Not yourself. Not the person you’re talking to. Because the chances are slim to nonexistent that you going to convince the person you were directly addressing that they are wrong. So let us look at the results of two recent engagements.

      First there was me taking on the idiot journalist. I went to his site and forcefully let him know that he was wrong. He refused to accept responsibility for his error. The result, as nearly as can be determined by postings here, on various Facebook sites, and on Twitter were that he was wrong and behaved poorly. Now we come to you, who is effectively doing the same thing, but in much greater detail, and far more aggressively and insultingly than I did. And once again, judging by the reactions of others, you are failing. Yet in your worldview, I am of the petty dictator while you are the… I don’t know. Hero?

      It could be argued, I suppose, that we are no different in terms of how we are going about our goals, aside from the fact that I am succeeding while you were failing. You, of course, no doubt believe the opposite. And that’s fine: everyone is always the hero of their own narrative. Which does not make you any less insane, I suppose. But you are insane.

      and no, my bowels were just fine when I had the stroke. Thank you for being concerned. Of course, if you heard differently, I’m sure that’s really all that matters to you.

      PAD

      1. Peter, I didn’t say that you doubted that Jack Riegel was my real name–I said that I’m not the “Jack Riegel” you located in St. Louis. But yes, your supporters seem to be convinced my name is false. This kind of thing really does happen to you much more than any other comics/fiction folk, doesn’t it?

        I have no interest in convincing others of my point of view. I’ve already said I came on here expecting no support. If I never get it from any others, so be it.

        My interest is in rubbing your old garbage, idiocy, and Petty Tyrant behavior in your face and making you gag on the stench. Someone else should have done that to you a long time ago.

      2. Jack Riegel:
        .
        > “My interest is in rubbing your old garbage, idiocy, and Petty Tyrant behavior in your face and making you gag on the stench. Someone else should have done that to you a long time ago.”
        .
        I have to ask. To what end? Why? If you don’t like Peter (and that’s certainly your prerogative), then why not just spend time in a place that makes you happier?
        .
        I’ll choose to believe that there are people in your life for whom you care. Why not spend your energy showing them how much you care rather than wasting it showing somebody else how much you don’t?

      3. “I didn’t say you said doubted Jack Riegel was my real name.”

        Really? So when you said this:

        “You’ve obviously had some difficulty believing that Jack Riegel is my real name.”

        That was a lie? A mistake? A boo boo? Or maybe you were talking to someone else? Or maybe, just maybe, you’re so obsessed about things I said, or that you believe I said, twenty + years ago, that you don’t remember something you said twenty+ hours ago?

        Seriously, if your goal is to make me gag on some sort of stench, you’re utterly failing. Because I’m actually giving you attention, you seem to have some sort of massively inflated ego. You think you’re having an impact or effect. You think you’re upsetting me. You’re really not. All you are–all you REALLY are–is the site’s latest troll. They crop up every now and then, filled with their own self-importance and inflated sense of self-worth. They piss and moan and say how evil I am, obsessed with the sound of their own voice. Typically they’re right wing ideologues who despise me because I have no problems with gays or gay marriage or interracial marriage or Muslims or whatever. But on occasion the occasional nut job makes his presence known and believes that he and he alone can take me on and make me see my worthlessness. And eventually, typically, they go away.

        So rant and rave if it pleases you. But honestly, it’s just amusing.

        PAD

    2. I suggested the possibility that this was all a put on by PAD not because it was something he has done in the past but because it would be sane. And kind of funny. As opposed to the harsh reality that you are in all likelihood mentally ill, which is just sad.

      I say this with no malice. Any doubts I had are gone. You say that he is the first person to inspire you to do this kind of thing. I can say with little fear of contradiction that the average person, if they were to read all of these posts, would conclude that you are in need of counseling. Please do not take this as an invitation to post another endless screed clarifying your position. We get it. We understand what has upset you. Just saying that this is not something normal people would be driven to this level of obsessive wackiness over.

      It would be far far bett for you if you were lying and there is something…anything! Between you and PAD that makes you need to do this. Because if you are telling the truth…if what you’ve told us is the sum total of your reasons for this madness…you need help.

      Or this is indeed a performance, but not from PAD. I guess that would be better.mthen again,mental illness can be treated but being a jerk is a terminal condition.

      1. Interesting. Peter says I’m the site’s “latest” troll. Bill Myers said there was a distinct lack of trolling for a “bit”.

        I’ve speculated twice that Peter receives much more of this than any other creator. Looks like I got my confirmation.

        Have you ever thought about what attracts these folks like moths to you to begin with?

      2. BWWAAAAAAHAHAAAAAA. That’s the funniest thing you’ve said yet.

        My troll count is pathetic compared to many of my peers. They have geeks like you harassing them, stalking them, making their lives miserable. And it’s hardly limited to comic creators. Tiny Fey did a flat out jeer at her legion of detractors when she won an Emmy. Everyone from Joss Whedon to Leslie Jones and everyone in between has hysterical detractors and legions of haters.

        Your unhealthy obsession with me has really skewed your viewpoint.

        PAD

      3. No. No, it isn’t. It isn’t you. It’s never you. It’s never, ever you.

        If there’s one thing I’ve been conditioned to expect to see after years of seeing your name mentioned in various chat rooms, it’s someone posting “With Peter David, it’s always, always, ALWAYS somebody ELSE’S fault!”

        Of course, that isn’t your fault either.

        I can believe your troll count is pathetic to others. Considering how whopping huge it is, they see it and cringe pathetically.

        Now, you’re not going to equate your experience to actual celebrities, are you? People that the real world outside comics actually cares about? No. No, no. You’re a nobody!(Yes, I’m a nobody as well. I don’t care. I suspect you do.)

        Yes, yes…you’re close personal friends with Mister Sulu, so therefore…

      4. Dude,
        .
        1) Bill making reference to Chalker was a joke. It’s the insane, fictional fanboy character from his old BiD columns. It was his way of saying your posts are almost too goofy to be real, that they look more like a parody of an angry fanboy than a real person’s posts.
        .
        2) The ref to troll activity confirms nothing. We see one like you every few years. They burn out and go away. You’re seeing things in other’s comments that simply aren’t there, which seems true to form for you based on all of your comments here.

      5. Jerry, you didn’t accuse me of being Ben Bradley this time either. You’re not going to meet your quota.

  20. I think over the years PAD has shown he believes there is a separation between the person and the work. That you can dislike the person and like the work and vice-versa. He defended the Ender’s Game movie stating that the work should stand apart of the authors views if those views are not in the work. PAD’s comments about Shultz work in the 80’s have nothing to do with PAD’s attitude to the man himself. Also, even if Shultz was alive when those comments were made Shultz didn’t need to defend his work. It is art, you either like it or not, there is no right or wrong. Last thing on this topic is that I see no hypocrisy on PAD’s part when Zelazny died for decrying the comment the fan made because the comment was about been glad Zelazny died because the fan did not like his work. Defending Zelazny is in line with PAD’s position about person/work separation.

    The comments about shooting minorities, mášŧûrbáŧìøņ, being overweight, the stroke are all uncalled for and paint Jack Riegel in a very unfavorable light. I see a lot of mentions of allies and supporters and turning them. Those give me the impression of a “us” against “them” mentality. A “you are either with me or against me and once you are against me or I am against you you are done” kind of attitude. The world is not that simple. It is not just black or white.

    Anyway, I don’t post that much but I try to read every post by PAD. I don’t agree with everything he says and that is OK. Like with every other person, I try to see things from his point of view and realize that our world view is shaped by our individual experiences and what is a priority for me may not be a priority to another person so disagreements will be a part of life. What makes us civilized is that we can move pass that.

    I am glad PAD found a nutritionist that works for him and is starting to lose weight and I hope that leads to a healthier and longer life so you can enjoy your grandkids and they can enjoy you for a long time.

    PAD, thank you for the hours of entertainment I hope you keep writing for years to come. I hope to get to meet you in a convention one day. This year I was almost able to on Megacon in Orlando but I had a last minute conflict and couldn’t attend. And please, finish The Hidden Earth Chronicles.

    1. Tony, if by “work” you mean his fiction, then that doesn’t enter into it. I’ve told other people that I’m not a fan of his, but not because of his fiction.

      I’ve never read any of his prose stories. I’ve read only three of his comics. The first was Atlantis Chronicles, which I didn’t pick up because of his name–I did so because I’ve admired Esteban Maroto’s work since the early 1970s. I thought the story was interesting(though I’ve read on other sites that this title was atypical of his usual work; the usual difference cited was that it wasn’t drowned in jokes). I picked up the subsequent series Aquaman:Time And Tide and the following Aquaman title because I thought story threads from that might be picked up. They were to an extent, but my interest, well, petered out and I eventually dropped the last title(It seems to me that a lot of readers really, really, hated it). I haven’t read any books by Peter David since.

      No, his handling of fictional characters is unimportant to me. But what I’ve read in that BID column, this site, his posts on sites other than his, the way he interacts with other people and creators…Good God, so much of that is utterly repulsive and disgusting to me.

      There’s only one thing about the comic work that truly disgusts me–specifically, how he’s used them as vehicles for revenge on people.

      In his BID column, he admitted taking a child custody court judge who angered him and sticking him into an issue of Young Justice to exact revenge on him. I don’t think Peter has any clue how unbelievably stupid that was! If the opposing lawyer in the case had searched for dirt on Peter–and since that column had been around for about a decade at that point, it was a likely candidate for a search–he would have found paydirt right there. If that column had been waved in that judge’s face, Peter’s ášš would have been hamburger. Custody lawyers these days make a point of warning clients never to do things like that. Peter has done this kind of thing over and over again to other creators and individuals who’d angered him in various titles for various publishers. The “Comic Book Legends” segment of CBR featured some of them, and many responses were scathing. I remember one saying something like “Good God! He is totally five years old!” I am absolutely convinced that he did this to his ex-wife in the wake of his divorce in the opening pages of Aquaman #40. He’s never admitted this–I think he realizes he’d be an utter pariah if he did–but as far as I’m concerned, anyone who brags about fixing a judge who made him mad is certainly capable of this.

      In the real world outside comics, this behavior isn’t praised. It’s condemned. It’s a textbook example of Petty Tyrant behavior. It is utterly repulsive, infantile, and, like that CBR post stated, something associated with five-year-olds. When actual five-year-olds do it, they get disciplined. I’m not sure how Peter ever evaded learning this.

      Well, CBR has been recently reconstituted, so maybe those Legend entries are gone. I’m going to have to grudgingly accept that Peter doesn’t remember any of this, so therefore none of it happened and I must be mentally ill.(I have no idea what issue of Young Justice this happened in; some lurker or poster probably has a copy.) I don’t think Peter does this anymore, though–considering his comics have been residing in the sales basement for several years now, I doubt his little revenges would be noticed.

      So, no, the fictional work isn’t a factor for me.

      1. You’ve gone completely off the deep end. I mean, it’s bad enough that you say stuff, deny you said it, and then when it’s pointed out you ignore it. But now you’re just fabricating things out of thin air. You know what? Screw it. Done with you.

        PAD

      2. Okay, I’m calmer now. When one reads that much crap in one sitting it can cause you to lose your temper for a bit.

        Short response: it’s complete BS. There is nothing in Aquaman 40 that relates to my ex. Zip. As for your fabrication about judges and YJ, that doesn’t even remotely track with timelines. Putting aside that I thought the judge in my divorce case was fair and even handed, I was split from my wife and everything was settled by 1998, which was when I first started writing YJ. So why in the world would I excoriate a judge that I liked over a legal matter that was settled?

        You’re reaching new lows, Jack. Bad enough that you make stuff up, loosely based on columns, and ignore it when called on it. But now you’re just fabricating things from the ether. Honestly, get some help because you’re nuts.

        Long response: nah, not worth it

        PAD

      3. Sore Loser.

        By the way, do you know what they call you–or at least used to call you–on Byrne’s site? “Shifty Pete”.

        Enjoy your accelerating memory loss, Shifty Pete.

  21. > Believe it or not, apparently I have on a number of occasions as well. People have come to me and said that my writing was a life saving experience for them: stories I’ve told or the way I’ve handled characters helped them through difficult periods that they say they would not have gotten through otherwise. I’m always incredibly flattered on the occasions people say stuff like that.

    Allow me to say it again. I know that I’ve mentioned it in emails (I still think it’s awesome that you don’t hide your e-mail, and that you actually respond to folks).

    I’m a 48 year old man. Married. Kids. Pretty happy. Wasn’t always the case. My teen years were dark for a number of reasons, and it’s pretty surprising that I’m still here today.

    I’m not going to say that PAD saved my life. But I will say that during those years when I didn’t have much to look forward to, I always looked forward to new comic book day, and spending a few hours with PAD. There were a select few others, but always PAD. The books, and the BID columns. When I had nobody else, I had you to come by and tell me some stories and make me laugh. Or you’d tell me about your teenaged years (which didn’t seem terribly different to mine), and gave me hope that I could somehow survive to become as strong as you.

    Putting it out here for everybody to see. Especially Mr. Riegel. I’m sorry to see somebody so angry that they spend this much time trashing another human being. I’m not suggesting that everybody’s going to love everybody else. But those that I don’t care for, I don’t spend my time and energy on. Life’s too short.

    Life’s also too short to spend trying to figure these things out. So moving on, just to reiterate one more time… thank you for everything, Peter. You don’t know me from Adam, but I’ll be forever in your debt. I’m sure there are many more out there like me who feel the same. In spite of what Mr. Riegel thinks, I believe the world is a better place for having had you in it. If not, at least my world is. 🙂

  22. I was a professional journalist for about two years, and yes, it is unfathomable to me that people disseminate unfounded speculation about things that are easily verifiable. It reminds me of the South Park episode making fun of the coverage of Hurricane Katrina. An anchor asks a correspondent if he’s actually seen any evidence of what he’s reporting. The correspondent replies that, no, neither he nor his colleagues have seen such things, “But we are REPORTING it.” Crazy.

    I decided to poke my head in here, virtually speaking, after a lengthy absence (not that I expect many people would remember me — it’s been a while) and noticed a distinct lack of trolling for a bit. And then, this. You know how they say it’s nice that some things never change? Well, no. Sometimes it’s not nice.

    FWIW I’ve been reading your stuff on and off since I was 12 or 13. Like Charlie, my teenage years were rough and reading comics was one of the few joys I had. Yours were among the ones I most looked forward to every month. Having a temporary escape was important to me back then. Having it come in the form of such well-crafted stories meant the world to me.

    I’m sorry you’re once again the recipient of unprovoked abuse, PAD. Particularly because I’ve always gotten the impression that you’ve worked very hard to write the best possible stories for fans to enjoy.

  23. First and foremost, congratulations on your grandson. Secondly, I’m sorry you’re having to do damage control on rumor mongers and their terrible ways. I would first like to thank you for all of your work, comic wise and series wise. Without expecting an official statement or something that would even be reported, where would you fall if you were able to continue the story of Young Justice? I ask as a fan of someone who doesn’t usually fall in the DC universe, but more of a Marvel Fanboy. It is this series that created a new interest for me (Kinghtfall fan caused the end of me). Whether you are able to answer this or not, I would greatly appreciate any reply.

    Thanks again,
    Benjamin Williams

  24. When Jack loses his vowels and I can’t understand a word of his, he actually makes more sense to me somehow.

    I noticed that my last two posts were held up by the moderation feature of WordPress. I completely forgot to assume PAD had it out for me personally (even though he doesn’t know me) and fly off the handle. Can I ever be forgiven?

    In the old days, after a troll flare-up died down Chandler and Mulligan would start bickering about zombies. You guys still do that? Not that I care about zombies but your Laurel & Hardy schtick was entertaining. Granted, I can see it on Facebook. But how about here for old time’s sake? 🙂

    Not to drag us off topic by going back on topic but having been out of the loop for awhile, I didn’t know there was a YJ animated series nor that PAD had done some writing for it. That’ll give me something to watch during whatever downtime I get this holiday weekend.

    Finally, yeah, I’ve read a lot about Rich Johnston, most of it from people who are pìššëd at him. Interesting to learn that he actually takes the time to check his facts. Reminds me of something New York Times columnist David Brooks said one of his journalism professors taught aspiring reporters: “If your mother says she loves you, check it out.”

    1. As a matter of fact in about 24 hours we will. Bickering about zombies on a panel at Dragoncon. Stop by for A TRIBUTE TO THE BLIND DEAD! Watch as Bill calls them zombies and Jerry disagrees, despite being WRONG! WRONG! WRONGITY WRONG WRONG!

  25. Wow… this thread reminds me why I no longer actively post here… although it has been entertaining.

    1. “Well, sir, I’d wake up Charlie.”
       
      “Why? What could he do?”
       
      “Nothin’ – but he ain’t never seen a train wreck.”

  26. As for Jackie boy, he had one chance to s ore a point-when PAD pointed out his, er, misremembering visa a vis the “name” thing.

    Could have owned up to it and looked like a guy secure enough to admit error.

    Could have tried to argue the point somehow.

    Nope! Just ignored it and hoped we would not notice.

    Spoiler alert! Everybody noticed!

    #sadtrombone

  27. I noticed that one of the original instigators of this story (Remember the reporter? It’s a story about a reporter…) felt the need to respond to this with a clickbait headline of “Peter David attacks fans of Young Justice!”. Seriously? It’s probably useless to point out to this yobbo that he’s just perpetuating PAD’s original point with misleading, inflammatory headlines like that.

    1. Oh definitely. I pointed out to him that he posted an inaccurate story without bothering to check with me. His response was to post a completely fabricated story, considering that I did not attack “fans”, but instead simply criticized exactly 1 fan: Him.

      So basically all he did was give validation to my initial criticism. What are the odds?

      PAF

  28. Even though I’ve not a journalist, when I email friends news and/or post on Facebook, I more often than not ignore any rumour type posts. If that means that a friend gets the story out before me because I wait for the rumour to be confirmed, so be it. I think aside from the clicking = money there’s also a bit of wanting to be the first to report the news happening. And being first rarely means most accurate.

    In terms of blog comments, my position is that people who comment on blogs are essentially guests of the blogger and should behave as they would if they were actually visiting the blogger. To that end, one can certainly disagree with the blogger and offer constructive criticism, as that is allowable in an actual visit. But showing respect for the host is still important. PAD is one of the best comic writers out there. This doesn’t mean I’m going to enjoy everything he writes or agree with every comment he makes, and I may choose to explain why I disagree, but I visit here because I have respect for him. People I don’t respect, I don’t visit their blogs. And even if I were for whatever reason to act out of character and comment on a blog post from someone I don’t like, the above rules would still have to apply. Always act like you’re in the blogger’s home.

  29. Putting up with that deranged troll with the grace you have is impressive. That you can still meet any deadlines you have while responding to him is even moreso.

    I apologize if you’ve answered this before, but what’s your methodology for finding a balance between writing time and free time? I’m trying to get into the business and it’ll be flat out impossible if I can’t manage to find that time balance and a way to maintain it.

Comments are closed.