Originally published March 11, 1994, in Comics Buyer’s Guide #1060
What’s that you say?
You’re publishing a magazine that’s not burning up the sales charts? People aren’t talking about you? You want people to notice you, and you’ll do whatever it takes, no matter now sleazy… so long as you stay juuuust this side of a libel action?
My friends, the answer is simple: Controversy.
Nothing will goose sales and scoop up pay dirt for the old ego-scan (looking through publications to see your name) like generating a good, old-fashioned controversy. And if you’re willing to do whatever it takes, why… you can generate a big controversy. Maybe (even better)… a long term controversy.
Here’s how you do it: APF. Attack Public Figures.
It’s easy. Anyone can do it. How, you ask? One of two ways:
1) Turn a blind eye to common sense, or…
2) Fabricate.
That’s all it takes. And if you go after someone who’s visible enough, or someone who people are really interested in… and, if best of all, the target then sues you… why, you can get months, even years, of valuable circulation boosting.
I will now endeavor to give you a primer in just how it’s done, as displayed by the absolute master of the form, Mr. Gary Groth.
In issue #165 of The Comics Journal, a letter appears in the editorial page entitled “Peter’s (Lack of) Principle.” Headlined “A Letter from Peter David,” the letter takes Groth to task for Fantagraphics’ public excoriation of a former employee, one Carole Sobocinski. Groth then spends a page and a half tearing the letter, and me, to shreds, labelling me a “mainstream hack,” a “know-nothing busybody,” “paranoid,” and “hypocritical.” While busily boasting about the Journal‘s history of “comprehensive investigative and advocacy journalism,” he also takes random and gratuitous slams at: Comic Buyer’s Guide; computer nets and the “ignoramuses” who frequent them; Harlan Ellison; and Max Allan Collins (misspelling his name).
Now…
I didn’t write the letter.
It was a fraud. A complete and utter phony.
Since I don’t read the Journal, it took one of the alleged computer “ignoramuses” to bring it to my attention… the aforementioned “ignoramus” being able to discern what Groth (who compared his journalistic principles to that of the Washington Post) did not or would not: Namely that the letter was fake.
Upon getting my hands on it subsequently, I called Fantagraphics and blew up at them over the phone (regrettably losing control and cursing at the hapless secretary who knew nothing about any of it.) Over four hours later, I received a faxed copy of the “original” (produced on letterhead that had my name, address and phone number on it, although it looked nothing like my real letterhead, nor was the signature mine) plus the Fantagraphics rolodex card with my name and address on it to “prove” that they had no reason to doubt the letter’s authenticity.
Now… there’s one of two possibilities here.
–Either Groth fabricated the letter himself.
–Or else he received it from someone else and desperately ignored every warning sign of its bogus nature. (And no, despite what several people have opined, it was categorically not manufactured by Todd McFarlane or anyone from Image. Don’t start getting distracted by trying to guess outside sources. There are no outside sources here. You see, there’s evidence I haven’t told you yet but, like any good mystery, these things must be developed.)
I will endeavor to try and produce shinola from the you-know-what and use this as a teaching sample for those of you out there who would actually be morally or intellectually bankrupt enough to follow Groth’s example for generating conflict.
Let’s examine the two options, in reverse order:
A) The Letter Came From Someone Else
The moment a letter arrived purporting to be from me, warning bells should have gone off at Fantagraphics. Because, you see, it was no secret there that I would have nothing to do with Fantagraphics; not since Gary Groth’s posthumous savaging of Carol Kalish years ago. Up until that time, relations between myself and Groth were strained–and even then I wouldn’t associate with Journal–but I had nevertheless just written an article about the Hulk for Amazing Heroes, one of Fantagraphics’ more innocuous publications.
Then the Kalish editorial hit, and when the editors from AH called about arranging payment, I told them I would never take a dime of Groth’s money. I didn’t want to know from him. Several times in subsequent months, Journal reporters would call me about something or other, and I reiterated my personal little boycott of Fantagraphics.
So it was unlikely I would break that boycott in order to defend Carole Sobocinski, a casual momentary acquaintance at best (and, I’m sorry, Carole, but frankly, I don’t remember meeting you at all), particularly considering that (since I didn’t want to roll around in Groth’s sty) I didn’t write in to defend long-time friend and mentor Kalish.
Groth ignored that.
The letterhead featured a piece of artwork: an illustration of the Hulk by Todd McFarlane. Now… how many people out there really think I’d be displaying artwork from Todd on my personal letterhead?
Groth ignored that.
The opening graph stated “It’s been a while since I actually wrote the ‘esteemed’ Comics Journal.” Yes, a long while. I don’t recall ever writing to them, to be precise.
Groth ignored that.
“What in Christ’s name are you folks thinking?” the letter demands. “What in Christ’s name,” a phrase sounding questionable coming from your humble Jew. Oh, I’ll cop to an astonished “Jesus,” perhaps. But swearing in Christ’s name? Uh uh. Too gentile.
Groth ignored that.
The letter accused him of going after Sobocinski because of her gender. Since Groth has proven himself capable of assailing people whether they’re male or female, young or old, living or dead, I would be most unlikely to make that charge.
Groth ignored that.
The letter takes a potshot at the Eros line… an insane comment coming from the creator of the sexually explicit–and in some towns perhaps even pornographic–Sachs & Violens.
Groth ignored that.
In his own rebuttal, Groth made mention of how I hang out on Compuserv, and that pros had been gossiping maliciously about the entire Sobocinski imbroglio. Groth stated he read it all. However, in all of that chatter, my entire contribution to the discussion consisted of precisely one bored message to the effect of, “Who cares?” That would seem to indicate that I would be the least likely person to write to the Journal.
Groth ignored that.
The letter had no logical structure.
Groth didn’t ignore that; he teed off on it (oftentimes displaying comparable gaps in argumentation–for example, citing ad ignorantium arguments on “my” part while, at the same time, indulging in equally irrelevant ad hominem attacks himself) while never asking the one question that would have made sense: Did Peter David really write this?
He sure didn’t ask me.
The Master of Investigative Journalism made no attempt to verify this snowball’s-chance-in-Hëll letter. In that same issue, Comics Journal boasts of phoning a California retailer six times to try and ascertain whether he really sold 2400 copies of Wizard. I see. That they had time for. But trying to check the veracity of a badly written letter from someone who makes a point of never writing to them… that they didn’t do.
Why? Probably because Groth didn’t want to. Truth was a distant second to Groth’s agenda.
Why should Groth have suspected someone might perpetrate a fraud? Well, Groth himself claims that the Journal was sabotaged at one point. That professionals, and the legendary “Vastator” are out to get them. Would one expect, then, total paranoia from Groth? No. But normal caution would seem to be dictated.
But why display caution when the results of “blissful” ignorance might be more sales?
Then again, it’s all moot if we go with the alternate option. Namely…
B) Groth or Someone Else at Fantagraphics Manufactured It
“That’s a serious charge!” you say. “First off, what evidence do you have!?”
Well, I have the following evidence (and it’s the reason that I know it was an inside job, rather than a concoction of any of my “obvious” opponents).
The rolodex card that Fantagraphics sent me as “proof” had a conspicuous and unlikely typographical error in my address.
The bogus letterhead had the exact same typo.
Whoever manufactured it used the Fantagraphics rolodex to do so.
But why? Why would Groth fabricate a letter just to attack me?
Well, here’s a curious bit of timing. This issue of Comics Journal saw print over a month after I ran the “Friends of Ellison” column. You remember: The one where I formed a club in response to the “Enemies of Ellison,” a group of venal cowards who banded together anonymously (at first) to launch an organized attack on Harlan Ellison. (They subsequently renamed themselves “Victims of Ellison,” presumably to make themselves sound more pathetic… not realizing just how pathetic they sounded to begin with).
Now granted, one has to allow for the Journal’s production time. But a two-page editorial can easily be stripped in at the last minute, and if Groth wanted to take immediate action to discredit and attack me, this was the best way to do it. And the timing is pretty amazing.
What’s the connection, you ask? That’s easy.
Gary Groth is one of the “Victims of Ellison.” He’s named as one of the founding members in VOE’s first published newsletter. Hard to believe. Groth is either a shoddy journalist, or else a fabricating slimeball. There’s no upside here. It’s like the old Daily Bugle headline: “Spider-Man… Threat or Menace?” Small wonder Groth and Ellison don’t exactly get along. Personally, I’m astounded… I mean, who couldn’t love a guy with such admirable traits?
Now we’ve got opportunity and motive. Unfortunately, this isn’t a criminal case; it’s civil (so to speak.)
Of course, Groth might claim that it was a disgruntled former employee who used the Fantagraphics rolodex card. He’ll probably try to finger Sobocinski.
What’s the likelihood? Well, let’s see: All I know about Groth is that he spews bile at every opportunity and helps organize anonymous slam groups (until forced into the open).
All I know about Sobocinski is that Groth doesn’t like her. Also keep in mind that, for her to gain any benefit from doing such a thing would require so many events to have fallen perfectly into place… well, Carole Sobocinski would have to be one of the most cunning criminal masterminds since Professor Moriarty to foresee it all.
Whereas, for Gary Groth to benefit, he merely had to act like a creep.
For the moment, I’ll bet on Groth.
But (you ask in astonishment) would Groth be that stupid? To fake a letter so that he then has to apologize and look foolish?
So what? So he’ll look foolish for a brief time. In the foolish category, he’ll simply join the ranks of Harlan Ellison and Dave Sim, who have both been publicly hosed by false letters in the past. This “foolishness” is outweighed by the benefits: Unloading on me for an issue, getting attention and… best of all… gaining that valuable issue-selling controversy.
Admit it: How many of you are reading this column right now and saying, “Wow, I gotta check out this issue and see what Peter David is talking about!”
But, but (you say, seeking final proof to refute the notion that anyone could be that duplicitous) why would Groth leave himself exposed to legal action? Hah! Answer that, David! You could sue him and he could lose everything!
No.
I can’t sue him.
And he knows it. Believe me, no one is more aware of just how far one can push First Amendment protection.
Groth is completely shielded. He can even manufacture a letter from me and get away with it. Oh, I could get an action going, sure. Maybe even survive a motion to dismiss. But after many long years—and issue after issue of Comics Journal with Groth milking it for all it’s worth—I would, ultimately, lose.
And here’s the delicious irony of why I would lose. The simple fact which is both Gary Groth’s greatest buffer, and his greatest frustration:
He’s not important enough.
He doesn’t rate. He’s irrelevant. He’s just a cess in the pool, a carp in the diem, a cockroach in the Grand Hotel of Comics. As far as the law is concerned, he’s too insignificant to hurt me. Not in the only way in which civil procedure recognizes, namely monetarily.
Nothing he writes about me in Comics Journal can damage me financially, because no one in the industry who has the power to hire or fire me gives a dámņ what he says. Oh, they might read the bogus letter and think, “Boy, Peter wrote a really stupid letter,” but that’s quickly attended to with this column and Groth’s retraction in the next issue of Journal. And there’s nothing that Groth can say that will make me lose Incredible Hulk. I won’t forfeit any novel deals, or any movie script assignments, because of his diatribes.
He has no power over me.
The only thing he can do is get attention for himself, which is what this installment of But I Digress provides. Perhaps I should not have indulged myself since, ultimately, it gives him what he wants. But I couldn’t help it; I suppose this edition of BID is the print equivalent of slowing down and staring in wonderment at a burning factory or a jack-knifed tractor trailer.
If Groth wants an ongoing feud, he won’t get one. This is the first time I’ve mentioned him in any prominent way in almost four years of this column, and it will be the last. I will continue not writing to Comics Journal (aside from one, terse, “for the record” letter stating I didn’t write the one in his editorial). Of course, he can just fabricate letters from me with impunity. He can attribute to me whatever he wants, knowing all the while that I won’t go after him legally… and having it gnaw at him why I won’t. Because, when all is said and done… his opinions of me (or anyone, for that matter) simply don’t count.
And that, my friends, is how to generate a controversy, sell additional copies of your magazine… and know, deep inside, that you are a total sham.
Class dismissed.
(Peter David, writer of stuff, suggests that anyone who was considering countering the above with “Well you never check anything” not embarrass himself by doing so. First off, despite the claims by some, I do, in fact, check things. Plenty of things. Particularly the outrageous things: And, more often than not, they’re unfounded, so I never write about them and you guys never know. And secondly, there’s a world of difference between writing an opinion piece based on publicly disseminated for-the-record interviews, and basing a piece on a bizarre and unlikely letter. The former is legitimate, the latter is slipshod.)
• 
Wow. Never read this one before, but this may be the best column you’ve ever written, Peter.
I remember when it came out. great stuff. Groth…well, all I have is hearsay from people I trust. He does not seem like someone I would want to spend much time with.
Groth does not seem like someone you’d want living in the same planet as you.
.
Alex Buchet – November 12, 2010 at 10:56 am: “Then explain, Einstein, how my post appears AFTER PAD’s?
The fact that I’m posting from Paris, France explains all.
Liar yourself.”
http://www.peterdavid.net/index.php/2010/11/05/what-peter-wrote-about-what-he-didnt-write/comment-page-1/#comment-215386
.
Oh, look, a post to you before any post of yours in the thread. Figured it out yet?
.
Alex, you’re a supreme idiot or you’re a jáçkášš and a liar. Either way you’re shrouded. Have a nice life.
Fascinating story, and well-told. I’d never heard of any of this.
In particular, I’m surprised never to have heard of what sounds to have at the time been some pretty deeply-bad blood between you and Macfarlane. I know he had worked with you on Incredible Hulk for a while, but beyond that, I have no idea what the backstory here is. Any light you can shed on it?
Here’s some background on it:
http://www.peterdavid.net/index.php/2010/09/02/after-the-great-debate/
or… umm…. reread any of the old columns from these reprints about Image.
So that’s where you got “Vastator of Borg.”
.
What I still find great in this BID was the way you pulled off basically verbally destroying Groth in every way possible but did so in a style that reads almost like casually discussing something. It wasn’t written in a manner that could read as screaming, angry or even overly concerned about Groth’s little stunt. It just reads as a here-are-the-facts bit that ends with essentially castrating Groth, patting him on his pointed little headed and sending him on his merry little way with the knowledge of how truly impotent he is.
Here is Groth’s article on Carol Kalish.
http://archives.tcj.com/2_archives/e_groth1191.html
To which I simply say : Why? Why be so mean-spirited to mock not only a woman who has just died, but those who grieve for her as well? Why? I can’t make sense of it.
The thing that most infuriated me, then and now, wasn’t simply the hurtful things he said. It’s not like he could hurt Carol; she was gone. What infuriated me was that he took the death of a bright woman at a tragically young age and used it as simply another excuse to launch broadsides at Marvel. Who does that?
.
PAD
Gary Groth
“The thing that most infuriated me, then and now, wasn’t simply the hurtful things he said. It’s not like he could hurt Carol; she was gone. What infuriated me was that he took the death of a bright woman at a tragically young age and used it as simply another excuse to launch broadsides at Marvel. Who does that?”
.
Someone without a soul, obviously. I mean, I have to ask, prior to this did he have some sort of grudge against “CBG”? I mean, who questions the way someone mourns or the wisdom of sincerity of their grief? maybe if you REALLY KNOW someone couldn’t stand someone and now they are turning on the waterworks. But even then, I belive such a feeling would not be right because you don’t know how someone feels inside.
.
the most ridiculous swipe he took at you, I think, was mocking that you stated you could only write one page of “X-Factor” that week. Speaking for myself, I too had a traumatic experience this year. it didn’t involve someone I cared about dying thankfully, but was about a notch below. as a result, try as i could, it took me THREE times as long to do the bio comic I was working on at the time than I had needed for the previous one. why? Because I’m human and it was harder for me to focus. how dare anyone make light of or mock the way you – or anyone else – deals with grief or doubt the sincerity of it? How dare they?
.
This guy is someone I’m ashamed to share the planet with.
Yep, Groth is total scum. One of those people that think everything is justified in their little ideological crusade.
.
I’m closer to some of my co-workers than others, but if any of them died young and tragically (I hope it never happens), I doubt the produtivity of that week would be the same.
.
And if one that I really liked died in that way, I’d be devastated. And I’d probably want to punch the lights out of anyone mocking my grief.
Plus notice that he got in a plug for Fantagraphics product by holding up an obit from an issue of Comics Journal as the proper and acceptable way to write a memorial.
.
PAD
Or in other words, it’s not WHAT he said (which was accurate), but HOW he said it. Look sad and sing “Kumbaya,” you cockroach!
Oh, Peter is slain! He is wounded unto death by your clever sarcasm!!
.
Crawl back under a rock.
I hate to disappoint you, Peter, but even had I read this column when it was first published, it would still not have aroused in me even the slightest interest in reading the ramblings of this Groth fellow. I can (and could at the time) get fabricated outrage for free from the politicians in the newspaper and on TV – no need to go spending money on some rag just to see more of the same from someone who isn’t ever going to be in a position to make a difference to anyone, ever…
Color me not the least bit disappointed.
.
PAD
(Note to self: next time I want to score some traffic for my own blog, write some nasty comments and sign PAD’s name to them. Then “call him out” for saying them. Be sure to include disparaging remarks about Joss Whedon, bowling, and Disney in the forged comments. For bonus points, have PAD take a cheap shot at Harlan Ellison and include at least one homophobic remark.)
.
J.
Noooo! Never mention Disney. They have Lawyers that will sue preschools for murals and gloat about it later.
Oh crap, I just mentioned Disney.
*hides*
If we’re thinking of the same preschool, as I recall Disney didn’t sue; they sent a letter insisting the mural of Disney characters be removed. The nursery school publicized it, Hanna-Barbera caught wind, and HB offered to send in professional artists to replace the mural of Disney characters, free of charge, with HB characters. The nursery school took them up on it and supposedly the artists took great glee in painting over Mickey and Donald and substituting Fred Flintstone and Yogi Bear.
.
Wasn’t Disney’s greatest moment.
.
PAD
I deal with copyright/trademark issues at work all the time, and I LOVE that Disney/HB story. I was first told it in a training class, and have passed it along several times myself.
.
J.
I really do not get Gary Groth at all. Friends of mine in the industry, reliable folks who don’t make stuff up as a rule, have told me he’s been very nice to them in person. This, combined with his public persona, leads me to two possible conclusions:
.
1: He’s one of those people who’s nice to people he can use, and an utter bášŧárd to everyone else;
.
2: Said persona is a carefully constructed facade, intended as some kind of bizarre marketing strategy. Kind of an anti-Stan Lee, if you will.
.
Either way, before he eventually faded into mostly irrelevance (when was the last time anyone gave a dámņ about anything he had to say? Was it in the past decade?), he made a name for himself as the person most poisonous to the discourse about this wonderful medium of ours, and apparently reveled in it. Who wants to be that guy?
Another possibility is that he’s one of those people who is emboldened by the anonymity or distance afforded by a given medium, who gets all brave when he’s speaking in that medium, but doesn’t have the guts to be that way to someone’s face, much like the various persons on the Web who act like trolls, but who would never have the guts to be trollish if they were to meet you in person.
.
At Nitcentral, a message board site I visit frquently, there was one poster in particular who was an utter creep. But I was told that when he spoke to people using ICQ chats, he was a lot more reasonable and friendly. It occurs to me that posting messages on a message board gives you a captive audience: Even people who can’t stand you may not be able to resist reading what you have to say. Unless a moderator deletes your posts and/or blocks you (which eventually occurred to the poster in question), some people lose any compunction about being obnoxious, and even in that case, you can still get some words in before that moderator has a chance to notice it and delete it. But in a private chat, someone’s a dìçk to the other person they’re speaking, he knows that the other person will just leave the chat immediately, and not speak to the churl again if it’s clear that that’s how the churl always behaves.
.
It’s possible the same holds true for people like Groth. If he works in a setting in which the only people he interacts with in person are employees who answer to him, and/or like-minded churls, then he may be emboldened to behave unethically, because other types of settings, like public ones, may provide a better filter to acting like an áššhølë.
You know, one of the many things that puzzled me about this situation was Groth’s piece on Carol Kalish. Considering he said in the piece that they saw each other infrequently and were on cordial if distant terms, what would possess him to to totally tear down somebody who was dwad and couldn’t defend themselves? To me, it read like the kind of piece that was written by somebody who had A) been rejected romantically, or B) completely humiliated in public at some point and either way was now taking the opportunity to settle the score. It doesn’t really make sense any other way.
Very little about Groth – particularly his belief that he is Immensely Superior To Mere Mortals – makes any kind of rational sense.
Thanks to the link that Jerome Maida generously provided, I believe I have found the answer to your question, Joe:
“…on an occasion or two when I would needle her about a particularly awful comic she was boosting, she’d usually admit its awfulness in what was meant to be a sotto voce, but ultimately justify it on the principle of supply-and-demand, the last refuge of the hustler. ”
Of course he back-pedalled his “professional” contempy by saying:
“…I liked her personally, respected her intellect, and abominated the uses to which she put both. Shilling for Marvel wasn’t, in my view, a responsible use to which personality and intellect should be put.”
To conclude this “classy eulogy,” Groth revealed the strongest reason why he resented Carol so much:
“…Marvel’s only goal, with which honorable men and women in this profession have nothing in common, is to generate as much profit for Ronald Perelman as they can, and to shovel as much s**t down the public’s gullet as they can get away with. They prey upon the ignorance of children and the stupidity of adults, and if they could wish every sophisticated reader of comic books to become stupid tomorrow they would do so, such is their commitment to art and humanity. They see comics not as art but as product from which the only end to be gotten is profit.
Kalish, who I have no reason to believe was anything other than decent and personable in her personal relations, devoted her professional life to expanding the hegemonic power of a corporation that already owns all the distributors and most of the retailers, and whose shrewd marketing efforts no doubt contributed to the recent eight million-copy sale of a single X-Men comic. Nothing written about her belies this. We should consider CBG’s memorialization of Kalish not only shallow and trivial, but a lie by omission on a grand scale.”
While it could be questioned whether Groth has any romantic leanings, it seems that professional jealousy and the possibility that he feels humiliatingly trapped in a medium that he hates due to Marvel, its “s**t shovelers” and their ignorant and stupid consumers.
Sorry, I hit “submit” before I finished:
While it could be questioned whether Groth has any romantic leanings, it seems that professional jealousy and the possibility that he feels humiliatingly trapped in a medium that he hates due to Marvel, its “s**t shovelers” and their ignorant and stupid consumers was reason enough for him to act like a betrayed lover who was moved to verbally spit on the grave of his betrayer.
His entire argument boils down to saying that a business venture is immensely evil for A) providing a product their customers wish to buy and B) attempting to earn revenue from said product.
As I can’t recall hearing about Groth having any relevance or success in recent years, it looks like he at least practices what he preaches.
Didn’t Groth work for Marvel one, way back in the Devonian Age, or the Jurassic? I misremember… in any instance, he’s a rotten pig bášŧárd, and I’d consider him so just from the stories I heard that didn’t involve him badmouthing Carol, Peter, and anybody else at Marvel that he thinks screwed him.
Look, with the exception of Joe Quesada, who went along with the idea of retconning Spider-Man back to high school, I don’t have anything against anybody at Marvel. Peter, I love you and your work enough to call you a friend and brother even though we’ll probably never meet. As far as I’m concerned, Carol qualifies for sainthood just because she got you started writing professionally. Okay, maybe you’d have gotten rolling on your own, but having a paying job at a publishing company is a great incentive. It’s something I’ve never managed; worrying about finding a job and paying bills has all but killed the book I was writing. I don’t figure I’m gonna get it done before I die.
Groth is a toad. That’s obvious. In the ranks of the villainous, he’s up there with Richard of Gloucester and Victor vom Doom. He used the death of a good and gentle lady to rail at her employers, and so deserves the hatred and scorn that’s been heaped up him. But in so doing, we acknowledge his existence, and he doesn’t deserve our notice.
Apparently he tried to work there in about 1973 but couldn’t make the grade.
.
This may explain why he has a perpetual hard-on for Marvel.
David, I read the link as well, but you did raise a few issues that perhaps I refused to think about, namely that it was possible to dislike somebody so much simply because they helped sell comic books. It reminds me of the guy who works in my local Dunkin Donuts; after somebody recently spent an inordinate amount of time trying to decide which donuts they wanted to buy, he looked at me after she left and shrugged his shoulders. ‘It’s just donuts!’ he said.
.
In a way, I feel the same way here: they’re just comics. If somebody was selling drugs to school kids, or building weapons of war or something that might impact people’s lives in a negative way, one might feel some hostility towards the folks involved. But comics? As sombody who’s spent rather a lot of time interviewing and writing about the folks who create comic books, I’d be the first to say we’re talking about an industry that doesn’t do much more than make people happy, but frankly I don’t see anything wrong with that. Surely it’s not worth kicking dirt over somebody’s grave.
.
And lest we forget, the name of Groth’s magazine was THE COMICS JOURNAL. If one experiences a road to Damascus moment, the weight of those newfound convictions would be better supported by simply not publishing a magazine devoted to comics in their various forms. Otherwise you’re just a hypocrite. And if you publish a magazine about comics while trashing the name and reputation of somebody who made a living selling comics, you’re an even bigger hypocrite. And making those comments after they’re no longer around to defend themselves, you’re a coward as well.
It reminds me of the guy who works in my local Dunkin Donuts; after somebody recently spent an inordinate amount of time trying to decide which donuts they wanted to buy, he looked at me after she left and shrugged his shoulders. ‘It’s just donuts!’ he said.
.
This has nothing to do with Groth, but you just reminded me of the day I married Kathleen down in Atlanta. All the out of town guests (and myself) were staying at a hotel in downtown and I’d hired a party bus to transport us all to the location for the wedding.
.
Since it was early morning, I decided to provide Krispy Kreme donuts for everybody. So about a half hour before the bus was to depart, I went to the nearby Krispy Kreme (I think Bob Greenberger was with me) and I told the girl behind the counter I wanted three dozen donuts.
.
She tried to hide it, but I saw her shudder inwardly, preparing for an endless selection process. Trying to suppress the dread, she said, “What kinds do you want?”
.
I said, “I don’t care. No jelly, cream filled, or powdered sugar,” which made sense to me because I wanted to minimize the risk of people getting food on their nice clothes, “but other than that it’s entirely up to you. Whatever’s easiest.”
.
Relief flooded her face. An order that could have taken God-knows-how-long suddenly became a job of about two minutes.
.
I’ll always remember that. Then again, I’ll probably always remember everything about that day.
.
PAD
Krispy Kreme” Urrrgggghhhhh.
“Was”? Has it gone on to a well-deserved oblivion? (I haven’t been next or nigh a comic shop in about five years).
.
That said. there were generally one or two decent articles in any given issue; not enough to buy most of them, but enough to stand by the comic rack in The Book Nook and read and discuss them with David…
Sigh.
.
Nope – it seems to be still extant.
.
If one would like to stir up some trouble over at Wikipedia, one could question the objectivity of this article, which reads as if Groth wrote it himself.
.
A sample:
I would be very interested to know who wrote that article, because you’re right, it sounds like either Groth or one of his people.
.
PAD
So much for NPOV.
“The foremost U.S. magazine of news and criticism pertaining to comic books and strips”???
.
“The zine demonstrated a pugnacious oversight of comic books as art and industry from the start.”???
.
“Objective investigations of industry news.”???
.
“Widely circulated, the list became the Journal’s best known and most controversial cover feature”???
.
None of these are supported by sources. There was also a good amount of criticism of the Journal in the Top 100 Comics list section, which was also unsourced. Off they go.
.
Thanks for pointing this out, Mike. I’ve now placed that article on my Watchlist.
Heh heh.
.
<Bugs Bunny voice>Ain’t i just a little stinker?</Bugs Bunny voice>
“Objective investigations of industry news.”???
.
I also hear it’s fair and balanced.
.
PAD
PAD: Ouchie! Owie!! Ouchie!!!
My, my, my.
.
Just rechecked the CJ Wikipedia article, and it’s a lot shorter and a tad more neutral-sounding; both of the quotes i pulled are gone…
While your points are valid, Joe, that wasn’t the point that I was making. I wasn’t implying that Groth was turning up his nose at the comic book industry. I was just exploring the possibility that Groth resented Carol because she didn’t consider selling Fantagraphics Comics or brands that he personally approved of (they tended to be one and the same in his eyes, but I’m attempting to be fair). If you want to combine your posting and Peter’s as an example, it’s like a Krispy Kreme proprietor turning up his nose at Dunkin Donuts and their “loyal customers” and saying “they have no taste and they’re ruining the market with their stupidity and crudeness, no offense to Krispy Kreme’s advertisers of course.” Pretending to praise her while insulting her and her “victims” at the same time.
Sorry, I meant “…no offense to Dunkin’ Donuts’ advertisers of course.” Pretending to praise her talents as a salesperson while insulting what she sells and her “victims” are buying at the same time.
I know you don’t want to give him any more publicity, Peter, but since you’ve been known to take relatively innocuous shots at people with whom you’ve either disagreed with, or who have otherwise caused you ire, either in the form of beatings from the Hulk’s finger, or being thrown down a warp core shaft, this column (which I have never read until now), along with a recent Futurama episode, had me thinking of a good upcoming scene in one of your comics:
.
Doctor: “Jamie, do you know you have a growth on your buttocks?”
.
Jamie Maddox: “Oh that? Yeah. That’s Gary.”
.
Doctor: “Gary?”
.
Jamie Maddox: “Yeah. I thought it first it was a dupe that didn’t fully form, or that was doing so really slowly, so I called him Gary. I thought he’d end up an independent dupe or something, kinda like that one that became a priest.”
.
Doctor: “So you named your growth?”
.
Jamie Maddox: “Yep. I named him Gary Growth.”
Doctor: “Gary Growth?”
.
Jamie Maddox: “Yep. He’s a really pain down there.”
Reading that link to the original Kalish article, it strikes me that Groth (at least back then; not sure if he ever tempered his anti-Marvel/DC mad-ons in the intervening years)would be right at home in the current political “take no prisoners; my way or the highway; death before dishonorable compromise” environment that’s permeated the country in the last few (i.e. more than two) years. Kalish was amoral because she was pragmatic about what kind of art will sell to the comic customers and thus make her employer money, and not so dedicated to art for art’s sake that she’d virtuously take a monetary loss just to promote “good” art? Ooookay. Whatever.
.
I do remember Groth answering this column in the CBG letters page at the time. As I recall, his defense was that asking him to ‘know’ enough minor PAD trivia (like a Jew not likely to use Christ as a cuss word) to discern the letter was a forgery just by reading it was asking too much of a casual acquaintance of PAD. I also recall someone (the Thomsons?) saying that didn’t excuse Groth from actually ASKING PAD if he really wrote the letter to begin with.
.
Gotta wonder, though, if this letter from the CBG eulogies wasn’t the straw that broke the camels back for Groth:
.
**********
.
By the November 22 issue, one reader who had barely heard of Carol Kalish and didn’t even know who she was had been so moved by reading other people being moved that she wrote:
.
What a person she must have been to have inspired so much. After reading Peter David’s article… I was made to pause to think about this incredible woman. I may not have ever met Carol and I don’t have the slightest idea what she looks like, but I can truly say that there is not one person I do know who has touched as many lives in such a profound way as she did. I, too, feel the loss.
.
********
.
Given when that editorial was first published (in the November 1991 issue), I can well believe Groth could have thought “Bad enough professional comics personnel who SHOULD know better what kind of chtonic evil inhabits Marvel are making this woman out to be a saint and a huge loss to the industry. It’s beyond tacky tacky tacky. But convincing a casual comic shlub that Kalish’s death was a great loss to the industry? IT’S GONE TOO FAR AND MUST BE STOPPED WITH MY INFALLIBLE TRUTH BEFORE IT SPREADS TO THE MAINSTREAM!!!!!” At least on some level, anyway.
.
Side question: Did Chuck Roten-guy (the guy who runs the Mile High Comics back issue company) also have a column where he said similar things about Kalish, or am I conflating him with Groth in my memory”?
.
Chris
Chuck Rozanski, and as I recall, yes, he also wrote something not-too-flattering about Kalish, which PAD responded to.
That column was reprinted in this space back in July of this year.
.
PAD
How exactly did Groth ever reconcile Marvel putting out what he considered to be trash to make a profit with fantagraphics putting out the eros line of sleazy pørņø comics for the exact same reason?
.
“How exactly did Groth ever reconcile… fantagraphics putting out the eros line of sleazy pørņø comics for the exact same reason?”
.
Groth Internal Dialogue Guess: “Marvel is putting out trash just to make money. Marvel’s trash is their means and their end. I’m putting out some trash for the drooling rubes, but it’s all so that I can finance the publication of my truly worthy titles that go unappreciated by 99% of the mindless masses in the comic market.”
.
But that’s just a shot in the dark based on knowing so many hypocrites like him.
Peter wrote a brilliant parody of a Tom DeFalco/Gary Groth debate that presented a viable explanation of how Groth could justify doing just that. I don’t know if it’s in the reprinted section of this site but it’s definitely in the first “Best of But I Digress” collection and I L-O-V-E-D it!
That’s one of my favorite, if not the favorite BID.
.
VIC: First, I’d like to thank both you gentlemen for taking time out from your busy schedules to join us. The first thing I think we have to do is define our terms. Gentlemen, I put it to you: What is art?
.
MATTY: Art is what tells a story.
.
VIC: Maybe I wasn’t specific enough. I meant, “How would you define `fine art.'”
.
MATTY: Art that tells a story that sells over a million copies.
.
LOUIS: God, this is pathetic.
.
Sorry, PAD, but the likeliest culprit is still Sobocinski.
She had photocopies of the Fanta rolodex stolen from the office.
She had already sent out bogus press releases and ads for interns with the aim of hurting Fantagraphics.
She was actively spying on TCJ on behalf of Kitchen Sink and outing its sources.
I don’t think your loathing for Groth should blind you to the probable truth.
BTW, this made you another of her victims.
And with Sobocinski allegedly doing all of that, and with Groth and Company presumably knowing all of that…
.
…they still couldn’t be bothered to consult that same compromised Rolodex, call the phone number on it, and verify the letter’s origin.
.
You can’t have it both ways. Either she was a threat to them, in which case they should have been at Defcon 1, or it was business as usual in the house of journalistic thoroughness. The same place that, as noted, had the time to call a comic book retailer six times to verify its sales on an issue of “Wizard.”
.
For what it’s worth, Sobocinski came up to me at a convention after my column saw print and assured me she didn’t send it. I have no reason to disbelieve her, and no reason to believe anything Groth says. And in the extremely unlikely event that she was involved, the only one who was victimized was Groth, who did it to himself.
.
PAD
Yes, but you confuse incompetence with evil. I think you should read the coverage in TCJ on Sobocinski’s alleged misdeeds there. (It was written by an outside ombudsman). They are thoroughly revolting– worse than anything alleged against Groth.
I’m so sure she would come up to you at the con and say, “Yes, Peter, I signed your name to a forged letter.”
Again, you are blinded by hatred.
Yes, but you confuse incompetence with evil
.
At some point, I’m not sure you really care. You’ve been gored and the difference between the two is kinda irrelevant (particularly at higher levels of incompetence….)
Yes, but you confuse incompetence with evil.
.
Can’t he be both?
.
Besides, the bottom line–the only thing that matters–is that the buck stops with him. And even then he couldn’t own up to it, writing the editorial all by himself but then hiding behind the rest of the editorial staff in the insincere “group” retraction.
.
PAD
“My friends, the answer is simple: Controversy.”
It’s been 16 years now and you’re still stirring the pot? Was TCJ in the wrong? Totally. But seriously, let it go…
Just so that you and various Groth employees and supporters who probably wound up here for the first time because they got a Google alert understand: We’re simply reprinting, on an ongoing basis, all the columns, in chronological order. This was just the latest one. And really: Groth has become so marginalized that, if seeking publicity were my goal (as it was for him) there’s nothing in it for me to “stir” anything.
.
PAD
“Was TCJ in the wrong? Totally.”
“Just so that you and various Groth employees and supporters…”
I’m glad to see that if even one critical word is said, the fact that I’m saying TCJ was wrong still makes me lumped in with your “bad guy” pool.
Seriously, let it go. Not because you’re reprinting the column, but based on your responses to everyone else’s comments, you are still letting it fester. That’s not healthy. In the court of public opinion, people know you were right. Not saying you need to forget, but perhaps it’s time to start removing some of that anger.
You really have reading comprehension problems. I lumped you in with no one. We already have a Groth employee chiming in. I mentioned you since I was replying to you. And I was anticipating Groth fans showing up. If I had said, “You and other various etc.” you would have a case. But you don’t. Now if YOU want to lump yourself in and characterize them as bad guys (your words, not mine) that is your own lookout.
.
The rest of your suggestions seem odd. Many of my columns have prompted much back and forth. I did not notice you opining I should have let those go. Only Gary Groth, apparently, should earn my silence. Only the holding of those opinions qualify as “festering.” You know how something festers? If you keep it in.
.
PAD
.
“Seriously, let it go. Not because you’re reprinting the column, but based on your responses to everyone else’s comments, you are still letting it fester. That’s not healthy. In the court of public opinion, people know you were right. Not saying you need to forget, but perhaps it’s time to start removing some of that anger.”
.
Your take on his comments may have more to do with your beliefs on the matter than how what’s being said is actually being said. I assume he still thinks Groth is a prìçk, but I figure that his anger over the matter isn’t what it once was and that his comments now are said more matter of fact than irate fury. That’s certainly how they read to me. You want him to still be seething so that’s how you’re reading it.
.
Having seen him talk in person about things in the past like this I’m pretty sure it’s a safe bet that my take on his posts here is closer to right than yours.
It’s been 16 years now and you’re still stirring the pot?
.
Reading comprehension fail.
So all of his replies to people’s comments were also written 16 years ago? Wow. I had no idea in addition to being a good writer, Peter David was also a psychic. Sweet. What are next week’s lottery numbers?
.
“So all of his replies to people’s comments were also written 16 years ago? Wow. I had no idea in addition to being a good writer, Peter David was also a psychic. Sweet. What are next week’s lottery numbers?”
.
No, but then all the replies he makes in threads based on old BID columns weren’t written when the column was either. People comment on the columns when they get reprinted here. Peter replies to the new comments. When people ask about or discuss the events that were and how they may be today then Peter comments on that. It’s not rocket science.
I had no idea in addition to being a good writer, Peter David was also a psychic.
.
I had no idea that, in addition to having no clue who you are but seeing that you’re a complete shill, you’re also an idiot. But thanks for making it painfully obvious to the rest of us.
.
You tell PAD to ‘let it go’, yet nobody forced you to come here and type up a few responses. Responses that, in fact, show that you have no intention of letting it go either.
GM: So all of his replies to people’s comments were also written 16 years ago?
Luigi Novi: No, and he didn’t say or imply otherwise.
.
Peter created this blog to interact with his fans, and allows comments in order to facilitate this. Among the content he places on it are reprints of his old BID columns, and because of the aforementioned comment ability, this means people can comment or ask questions about those columns, and because of the aforementioned desire on Peter’s part to interact with his fans, naturally, he will answer them where applicable.
.
Is any of this questionable, GM? If so, which aspects of it, and why?
.
And if not, then in what way does any of this constitute “stirring the pot”, or “not letting it go”?
.
Your comment seems predicated on the assumption that if one has let it go, that they should be completely silent, and that anything other than this is indicative of some type of long-standing grudge or obsession. But why? Can’t there are be other possibilities? Can’t there be, for the sake of argument, at least one middle ground–namely, that Peter has let it go, and that he is completely calm and casual in answering questions or comments about this column? Again, should he not post old columns? Or not allow or respond to comments? What would he do differently that would indicate to you that he has indeed let it go?
.
Seen this way, it’s hard not to conclude that your comment is just an attempt at a personal taunt, and reflects your state of mind far more than it does Peter’s.
In what way has Groth been marginalised? As a publisher and editor, he’s more central than ever. Complete Peanuts, anyone? Joe Sacco, anyone?
The reference to Groth “employees” is pretty pathetic; I’m the only poster on this thread to have defended him. Yes, I write a monthly column for a TCJ-hosted blog, ‘The Hooded Utilitarian’, but a) I’ve never had the slightest contact with Groth, and b)the blog has been violently critical of Groth:
http://www.tcj.com/hoodedutilitarian/2009/12/yesterday-was-always-better/
My contributions are unpaid.
Groth made three errors:
a) He wrote an insensitive, offensive article about a recently-deceased, beloved figure in the comics business.
b) He trusted Carol Sobocinski, a crook.
c) He failed every test of journalistic professionalism by printing Sobocinski’s forged letter under PAD’s name, and responded to it excessively.
Those are three bad failings, particularly the third. And PAD is justified in feeling hatred and contempt towards Groth.
However, this is no excuse for floating the silly theory that Groth or one of his ‘minions’ forged the letter. Face it, Mr David, it just makes no sense whatsoever.
The disturbing part of your attitude, Mr David, is that you are willing to throw common sense out the window and give a free pass to the woman who exploited you for malignant reasons.
But, hey, if that’s the mindset you choose… I’ve got this bridge in Brooklyn that’d make a great investment for you!
I was wondering when you were going to mention that you write for him. I mean, I knew it, but you might have wanted to let others know where your loyalties lie. In terms of being marginalized, I was referring to the fact that, aside from a rapidly shrinking circle of devotees, his opinions of the industry have no influence. I find it interesting that you literally have to go back sixteen years to find something he said worth responding to. I mean, when a Wikipedia entry is so self-congratulatory that it becomes obvious something is up, how pathetic is that?
.
As for the three errors you cite:
.
a) That’s right.
.
b) Sez you.
.
c) That’s right.
.
As far as exploitation goes: Sobocinski’s is speculation. Groth’s is on record.
.
PAD
Interesting to note that you’ve gone from
to
Also interesting is that it took you that long to mention that you have a dog in this fight.
.
Setting aside Groth’s (probable) shortcomings as a human being, and TCJ’s (virtually certain) shortcomings as a “journalistic” enterprise, i’ve always been fascinated by the obvious ax-grinding in TCJ “critical” and opinion pieces.
.
While i have you here, have you any response to the apparently-logical assumption that Groth or some minion (you?) wrote the Wikipedia article about TCJ? (Since it certainly sounds like a “press release” put out by a corporate PR flack…)
So all of his replies to people’s comments were also written 16 years ago? Wow. I had no idea in addition to being a good writer, Peter David was also a psychic. Sweet
Dude, you’re being a jerk. Ya oughta stop.
PAD:
“I was wondering when you were going to mention that you write for him. I mean, I knew it, but you might have wanted to let others know where your loyalties lie.”
I’m the one who mentioned my TCJ connection, not you. So your insult falls rather flat. And, by the way, I don’t ‘write for him’. I write for myself, and for my readers.
It’s a sad spectacle we have here. Peter David is victimised by Sobocinski, and he goes all Stockholm Syndrome by exonerating her, in the cause of defaming a man he deeply hates.
Sad, sad, sad.
You really have no idea how ridiculous you’ve looked from the beginning, and how you’re upping the ludicrousness quotient with everything you say, do you?
.
As i said, you began by sayig “it was probably Sobocinski…” and now it’s “PAD was victimised by Sobocinski…”
.
Dude, it’s okay. We understand that Gary Groth (pitiful excuse for a human being that he is – an opinion that i had formed long before this whole affair originally blew up) is your mentor and the Guiding Light of your journalistic universe.
.
Sad that you could be so deluded, but, hey – there were people who thought that Stalin was a great world leader.
.
Just stop wasting electrons defending the undefendable.
I’m the one who mentioned my TCJ connection, not you. So your insult falls rather flat.
.
It wasn’t an insult. It was a simple statement. I knew you wrote for TCJ; I just chose not to bring it up, deciding to address your comments rather than your motivations. I find it interesting, though, that you equated working for TCJ with being an insult.
.
And, by the way, I don’t ‘write for him’. I write for myself, and for my readers.
.
“No man but a blockhead wrote, except for money.”–Samuel Johnson
.
It’s a sad spectacle we have here. Peter David is victimised by Sobocinski, and he goes all Stockholm Syndrome by exonerating her, in the cause of defaming a man he deeply hates.
.
I think the truly sad spectacle is you, actually. As for Groth, he’s done fine defaming himself. He has never needed my help.
.
PAD
Mr David, I don’t write for TCJ. Would that I did! I write for the blog ‘Hooded Utilitarian’. It’s hosted on the TCJ website, but has no other link to it.
The ‘insult’ was the insinuation that I was trying to hide my connection to the blog. I’m not a liar, Mr David, even by omission.
Mike Weber, bite me. I don’t engage with sycophants.
Mr David, I don’t write for TCJ. Would that I did! I write for the blog ‘Hooded Utilitarian’. It’s hosted on the TCJ website, but has no other link to it.
.
Well, then keep at it, young man! Continue your unpaid labors and someday you too may be able to fulfill your dream of writing for a magazine that is largely thought of with contempt, when anyone bothers to think of it at all.
.
The ‘insult’ was the insinuation that I was trying to hide my connection to the blog. I’m not a liar, Mr David, even by omission.
.
You’re going to get splinters in your neck from that chip on your shoulder. There was no insinuation of anything. You’re the one who brings up interesting words, such as “insult” and “liar,” generated by the inferences you’re drawing.
.
The facts remain: You have direct ties to Groth and show up on this blog for the first time specifically to defend him. Have you been reading this blog the entire time and just never felt strongly enough about anything to address it? Or do you have Google alerts for anything Groth-related because of your associations with him and decided to ride in to defend his honor? Either way, as was said up-thread, you have a dog in this hunt. You chose not to make that explicit up front. Your reasons are your own and honestly of no interest to me, but the fact that you are SO defensive about it speaks volumes.
.
Mike Weber, bite me. I don’t engage with sycophants.
.
I honestly don’t think that a drive-by poster who, on the surface, showed up purely to defend the honor of the publisher for the magazine that he wishes upon a star he might get to write for someday gets to throw around the accusation of sycophant.
.
PAD
And the insults and lies continue. I suppose you find that an adequate substitute for thinking…or for merely giving yourself a long, hard look in the mirror.
I have no “direct ties to Groth”. I’ve told you that. If you’re offended by my calling you a liar, well– the aforementioned mirror beckons.
I found this post via Tom Spurgeon’s The Comics Reporter.Bad! Bad Spurge, exposing PAD to non-worshippers!
Defend Groth? Get some new reading glasses and peruse what I’ve actually written here. I condemned Groth for his ugly article on the late Carol Kalish and for his journalistic incompetence. I dared — DARED! — question your paranoid and illogical accusation that he fabricated the phoney letter himself.
I also note that you never bothered to reveal to your readers the Carol Sobocinski theft and fraud. Ah, but if you had, they might’ve come to an independent opinion different from yours — and we can’t have that, can we?
Mike Weber is a sycophant. Worse– he highlights your hypocrisy. You’ve written at quite a length in your columns bemoaning the lack of civility on the Internet and the omnipresence of trolls.
Turns out that trolls who lick your boots are perfectly acceptable to you — as this entire comments section proves.
Groth= Stalin. Great going, Mike Weber. Your personal PAD pat on the head is on its way.
And, PAD? If I was so all-fired up to get published in the Journal, it would be a Hëll of a way to do so by criticizing Groth on his enemy’s blog.
Simple logic…but in this matter, logic and you are long divorced.
That’s it? That’s your best shot?
.
No, no, no…won’t do at all. You’ll never pass muster for TCJ that way. You’ve got the petulance down, but they want arrogance. Nor is there anything original here. Taking straightforward truthful statements and saying they’re lies? Old hat. Declaring that anyone who agrees with an opponent is a toady or bootlicker? So ancient you can hear the creaking in the joints. But keep at it; keep trying to raise your game and you might, just might, get to work for a magazine so popular that there weren’t enough stores interested in ordering it to keep a newsprint edition viable.
.
Tom actually thought that a reprinting of a column from a decade and a half ago was worthy of being reported? Wow. Must have been a slow news day. Someone should give him a heads up that some artists from Marvel are thinking about starting their own comics company.
.
PAD
Tsk, tsk, Mr David.
It’s always sad to see a desperate man.
As your campaign to promulgate your lies has deflated, you’ve become more and more vicious in your posts here.
I sympathise: it’s always hard to set up a barrage of lies against a truth-teller, isn’t it?
Far easier to strike with senseless ad hominem attacks, even though the most clueless reader can see through them in an instant. I dig it,man, I’m there.
The bottom line:
I told the truth.
Peter David lied.
Nothing’ll change that, you know? So continue your incompetent libels, continue to encourage your retinue of ášš-lìçkìņg trolls. Makes no difference.
Little man, I only hope that one day you, or your daughters, awaken to the possibility of an ethical life.
Until then, Peter, thanks for the article fodder.
(Oh…and your pet toady, Mike Weber, still has the permission to bite me.)
Further proof that one need not be anonymous on the internet to be a complete dickwad.
Until then, Peter, thanks for the article fodder.
.
The following update has been done to accommodate the increasingly shrill, and wildly inaccurate, rants of the latest Groth wannabe:
.
What’s that, you say? You’re (producing a blog) that’s (obscure)? People aren’t talking about you? You want people to notice you, and you’ll do whatever it takes, no matter now sleazy… so long as you stay juuuust this side of a libel action?
.
My friends, the answer is simple: Controversy.
.
Sadly, Alex has a long, long way to go to be a sufficient douche to warrant an entire “But I Digress,” which he may well see as his key to finally getting to write for TCJ. Perhaps he’ll go the distance. Kind of doubt it, though.
.
PAD
You know, you started out half sane but with every posting you have shown more and more ášš. It’s obvious you have been lurking here for a bit tough–you have pretty much hit all the troll marks we’ve seen before. People disagree with you? Úš-lìçkìņg toadies! Sycophants! Flunkies! Wait, let me check out a thesaurus…Lickspittles!
.
And then you mention his kids. Wow. And yet…and yet…even this almost guaranteed surefire can’t miss way to get him riled up doesn’t earn you the attention of a real takedown. Guess you just don’t rate.
My friend, if i saw Peter making half as big a spectacle of himself as you have in just a few not-so-short posts here, i’d tell him so.
.
And if he came across as so desperate to refute the (probable) truth as you, i’d likely be offensive, too. (In fact, i believe i have, though the discourse was not terribly heated.)
.
(Perhaps not as offensive as i could be if i wanted to – you ain’t seen nothin’ yet – because i’ve known and liked Mrs David since she was in high school, and wouldn’t want to upset her … unnecessarily.)
.
But, based on years of reading Groth’s screeds, mouthings and rants (since before i really knew who Peter David was), nothing he said in the original column is incinsistent with my own opinion of the man and his magazine.
.
You still haven’t bothered to explain how Sobocinski’s “authorship” of the letter in question went from “probable” to “established with the force of Holy Writ” between one post and the next.
.
You are a sad sad little man, kissing up to Gary Groth.
.
BTW – i wouldn’t bite you; i’m far too careful about the quality of what i eat.
Alex Buchet says: “The bottom line:
.
I told the truth.
.
Peter David lied.
.
Nothing’ll change that, you know?”
.
.
.
Alex, you’re talking out of your ášš. Please pay attention to this quote from the actual BID column in question.
.
.
“Now… there’s one of two possibilities here.
.
–Either Groth fabricated the letter himself.
.
–Or else he received it from someone else and desperately ignored every warning sign of its bogus nature.”
.
.
The best you’ve been able to do here is claim that the likely culprit is Sobocinski while sourcing the history of her misdeeds against Groth to an article written in the oh so credible (that’s sarcasm by the way) TCJ. He’s stated that he doesn’t believe her to be the writer of the letter in question. He’s also stated that he would put his money on Groth if he had to point to someone as the writer of the letter or someone who was involved with the creation of it in some way or another.
.
Two things with that. Your pointing out that someone else wrote the letter isn’t a new idea to the discussion since Peter himself has allowed for that from day one. Of course, even if Peter had not allowed for that himself it would mean absolutely nothing to have you bring up Sobocinski since your suggestion that she is a strong contender for the letter writer is merely your opinion and not a fact.
.
But the fact is that even if Groth was not involved with faking the letter he acted like either (1) a world class idiot or (2) an opportunistic ášš who knew he had a fake letter but decided to use it to grind his personal ax. Peter (amongst other people) had made Groth look like a jáçkášš quite a bit in that particular period of time and, as Peter noted in the BID column, he had just ripped a new one in Groth by ripping the cowardly “Enemies of Ellison” that Groth was a cofounder of. Really, the best that can be said here about Groth is that he ignored countless red flags and failed at every level of intelligence and journalism. But while Groth has in the past proven to be crass, a lowlife áššhølë and one to grind an ax to ridiculous levels; he has shown in the past that he is not quite as stupid as he would have had to be to have fallen victim to the faked letter.
.
Of course, if you feel that Groth is just brick stupid then please feel free to say that Groth is in fact as dumb as a rock. Doesn’t change anything though and still doesn’t make Peter a liar. Or, to quote Peter-
.
Peter David: “For what it’s worth, Sobocinski came up to me at a convention after my column saw print and assured me she didn’t send it. I have no reason to disbelieve her, and no reason to believe anything Groth says. And in the extremely unlikely event that she was involved, the only one who was victimized was Groth, who did it to himself.“
.
Let’s look at that last line again.
.
“… Groth, who did it to himself.”
.
.
No lie there no matter who you think wrote the thing. But you’re just going to insist that Peter is wrong and telling a lie because that evil Sobocinski woman really did it and he doesn’t think that she did. Again, as I stated above, those are opinions based on what Peter knows of Groth and from their past encounters and not expressions of fact. It may be the likeliest probability, but it is still just his opinion and that’s how he’s presenting it here; as his opinion. You seem to have trouble understanding that your opinions are not facts and that the opinions of other that you disagree with are not lies. (Hey, what do you know… You may have a promising career in your future at TCJ after all.)
.
Groth either fabricated the letter or he allowed his personal feelings for Peter get in the way of doing the most basic kinds of fact checking before once again making a public ášš of himself. Sobocinski, writer of the letter or not, is irrelevant to the equation. I could write a letter to CBG tomorrow claiming to be Groth and if the CBG editors print it and, even better, respond to whatever slanders I write by ripping Groth a new one without doing the most basic checking on the authenticity of the letter like contacting Groth then it ain’t my fault. It’s their fault for being stupid or blinded by their feelings of dislike for Groth.
.
Same here. Groth was an idiot yet again who did an incredibly stupid thing yet again. Pointing that out is not a lie and stating that you lean towards Groth being a knowing participant in the fraud based on past actions of Groth isn’t a lie either. All of your attempts to claim otherwise don’t change that no matter how much you at like an ignorant ášš about it.
Many years ago – more than twenty, for sure – my first wife and i got home from a convention, and hadn’t been in the apartment long before the phone rang; it was the late Karl Edward Wagner, who had been asked by Andy Porter to write an appreciation of Atlanta fan/pro Jerry Page, who had preceded Karl as editor of DAW’s Year’s Best Horror Stories anthology.
.
“Mike,” he said, “What do you know about Jerry Page committing suicide?”
.
I’d been out of town, as i said, for several days and hadn’t been back long enough to have heard anything if there was anything to hear.
.
He said that Porter (and, as it turned out, Charlie Brown at Locus) had gotten letters postmarked Atlanta, from Jerry’s brother, saying that in a fit of depression, Jerry had killed himself.
.
I told him not to do anything till he heard either from me or from Jerry himself, and began making a bunch of calls. (I didn’t try to call Jerry, because he lived with his mother, who was rather elderly, even then, and if it was true, i didn’t want to distress her.)
.
Eventually, one of my calls connected with a mutual friend (in California), who was able to determine that it was not true, and arranged for Jerry to call me.
.
In turn, i put Jerry in touch with Karl, and Jerry called Porter and Brown.
.
Jerry Page has no brother, BTW.
.
Anyway, the point of this long story is that it took about four phone calls to disprove the hoax; it might have taken even fewer if Karl had had Jerry’s home number.
.
And Karl didn’t allege himself to be a professional journalist, dedicated to truth and accurate reporting.
.
Gary Groth, however, did and does.
.
Interesting that the one who didn’t claim to be showed more journalistic integrity than the one who does.
My, my. The jackal pack is out in force. Good mobilisation chops, PAD.
Merely screaming a torrent of abuse and lies doesn’t negate the truth I tell.
For the record: the article on Sobocinski’s crimes was investigated and written by an outside ombudsman.
These crimes are attested by a witness: an intern she corrupted who suffered pangs of conscience and confessed all to Groth. The intern lost out by this, BTW. His advisor was Sobocinski, and he never got the credit he needed.
The main theft Sobocinski committed was that of the contents of the Fantagraphics rolodex. She used this to send obscene and threatening mail in Groth’s name to a wide range of artists.
She also released a fake press release purporting to announce a new comics company founded by dissafected Fanta artists headed by Peter Bagge. This was an obvious attempt to hurt the business of both parties. (Sobocinski hated Bagge, whom she called a Nazi because of his mild Libertarianism.)
The fact that the forged letter purportedly from PAD incorporated the same typo as the Rolodex card is proof: Sobocinski did it.
Apparently PAD is fine with people forging documents and signing his name to them. Pad: she was laughing at your gullibility when she swore she didn’t do it.
About the other lie– that I’m just trying to promote my blog– re-read my posts: I didn’t mention it until PAD insinuated that I was a Groth employee shilling for him. I set the record straight…which didn’t stop PAD from continuing to lie about me.
As for mentioning his daughters: as a parent, it is his foremost duty to raise ethical children, and the way to do so is by giving an example of his own ethical conduct.
He refuses to do so.
As for the rest of you: what a sorry, sorry lot of trolls.
When Irony And Hypocrisy Know No Bounds: The Alex Buchet Story.
Oh, and and in case you missed it: the ‘jackal pack’ is here all the time.
.
You, on the other hand, will eventually go crawl back to your who gives a rat’s ášš website, never to be seen or heard from again. Big man indeed.
As for the rest of you: what a sorry, sorry lot of trolls.
.
You’ll forgive us for not putting a lot of stock in the opinion of someone who dragged PAD’s family into this. That says all we need to know about you.
The fact that the forged letter purportedly from PAD incorporated the same typo as the Rolodex card is proof: Sobocinski did it.
.
Noooo…it proves that the Rolodex card was used to write the letter. That is all it proves. The rest is conjecture.
.
But I’ll say this for you, Alex: your ability to spout untruths should certainly groom you for TCJ employ. Unfortunately, as is usually the case with lies, it’s tough to keep track of them, and thus you demonstrably stumble, such as this one:
.
About the other lie– that I’m just trying to promote my blog– re-read my posts: I didn’t mention it until PAD insinuated that I was a Groth employee shilling for him. I set the record straight…which didn’t stop PAD from continuing to lie about me.
.
Uh…no. The posting in which you first discussed your blog was in direct reply to a posting I had given–not to you–but to someone signing their name as GM. I said to that guy that Groth had marginalized himself…you responded to that, and THAT was where you first brought up your website. I had made a sweeping reference to Groth employees and supporters, but since you had already self-identified as supporting him (” I’m the only poster on this thread to have defended him”) you weren’t disputing that, and so whether you were an employee or not was really beside the point. So just now, when you said you brought it up in direct response to my so-called insinuations, that is provably wrong. Simply scrolling up the thread, would have prevented you from making a fundamental blunder, but you couldn’t be bothered to do the most minimal research…
.
Good heavens, how is it that you’re not writing for TCJ yet?
.
PAD
Whew, this is like shooting fish in a barrel.
Pad:
“…whether you were an employee or not was really besides the point…”
(BTW, this doesn’t change the fact that PAD lied by stating I was a Groth employee. I love how he tries to weasel out of this.)
PAD:
“Uh…no. The posting in which you first discussed your blog was in direct reply to a posting I had given–not to you–but to someone signing their name as GM. I said to that guy that Groth had marginalized himself…you responded to that, and THAT was where you first brought up your website. I had made a sweeping reference to Groth employees and supporters, but since you had already self-identified as supporting him (” I’m the only poster on this thread to have defended him”) you weren’t disputing that, and so whether you were an employee or not was really beside the point.”
This is where you shot yourself in the foot.
PAD:
“You really have reading comprehension problems. I lumped you in with no one. We already have a Groth employee chiming in…”
And you made it clear that I was the fictional “Groth employee” you made up.
This was BEFORE I revealed my connection to ‘Hooded Utilitarian’.
Who else could you have meant by ‘Groth employee’?
Hmmm?
We’re waiting…
Nothing to say?
Why am I not surprised?
Note, too, how when I calmly demonstrated to PAD that I was NOT a Groth or TCJ employee, he changed his lies to shrieking that I wanted to be one.
I don’t. I’m a fan. I’m not a professional writer.
(I can imagine PAD’s reaction to the last sentence: “At last, SOMETHING we can agree on.”)
PAD writes (very readable) fiction. But fiction and reality aren’t the same, Peter. You should learn that someday before it’s too late.
I’m going to hotlink this column and comments section all over the place.
Peter David is the symptom of a disease that is eating away at society. He projects the image of this friendly, hardworking, fair-minded average American.
In reality, he’s a narcissistic, bullying manipulator; one who totally buys into the modern age’s “ethos” of “self-branding”.
Sometimes the mask slips, and the liar stands revealed– as has happened here.
Adios, phoney.
Jerry already pretty much demolished your time line, so I’ll just second the notion that “threatening” to link to this site isn’t that much of a threat.
.
PAD
He’s not a good enough writer to write for TCJ. I have no great interest in that magazine anymore (surprised to hear it’s still ongoing, truth be told) but I recall it having at least some technical standards, if not much in the way of ethical ones.
.
I suspect that he’s hoping that demonstrating some enmity toward one of Groth’s old targets might ingratiate himself, maybe get him a spot he otherwise can’t earn. Doubt it will work, it’s not like this sort of thing is hard to find. Internet douchewheels are a dime a dozen. I’m no Groth fan but I can’t imagine they’re THAT hard up. Seriously, sir, I would really advise against linking this all over the place, unless you’re angling for a position at Dickwad Weekly.
.
I love how, if everyone disagrees with them, these feeps always claim to be the victim of Peter’s Legion of Sycophant Defenders (PLOSD. We have T-Shirts and everything. I got elected treasurer.) Because, you know, I would never disagree with anything PAD says!
.
On the other hand, if we agreed with him, it would be because he’s right. Win-win!
Alex, you need to learn how to read a little bit better than you do now.
.
““You really have reading comprehension problems. I lumped you in with no one. We already have a Groth employee chiming in…”
And you made it clear that I was the fictional “Groth employee” you made up.
This was BEFORE I revealed my connection to ‘Hooded Utilitarian’.
Who else could you have meant by ‘Groth employee’?
Hmmm?
We’re waiting…
Nothing to say?
Why am I not surprised?”
Peter’s comment- “You really have reading comprehension problems. I lumped you in with no one. We already have a Groth employee chiming in. I mentioned you since I was replying to you. And I was anticipating Groth fans showing up. If I had said, “You and other various etc.” you would have a case.”
http://www.peterdavid.net/index.php/2010/11/05/what-peter-wrote-about-what-he-didnt-write/comment-page-1/#comment-213659
.
The time of that comment is tagged as “November 9, 2010 at 10:13 pm”
.
Your comment- “Yes, I write a monthly column for a TCJ-hosted blog, ‘The Hooded Utilitarian’,”
http://www.peterdavid.net/index.php/2010/11/05/what-peter-wrote-about-what-he-didnt-write/comment-page-1/#comment-213536
.
The time of that comment was tagged as “November 9, 2010 at 3:27 pm”
.
Now, in the real world, Nov. 9, 2010 @ 10:13 pm is after Nov. 9, 2010 @ 3:27 pm and not, as you claim, before it. You really are ready to work for TCJ, aren’t you?
With that sort of attention to detail, you, Jerry, have no future at TCJ.
.
PAD
I’m going to hotlink this column and comments section all over the place.
.
Uhm, you may want to think twice about that. Unless you want people to think you’re a total ášš. In which case, link away, little troll.
Yeah, that’s hilarious. On the one hand he claims it isn’t about trying to get himself publicity, and on the other he boasts how’s he going to link to a thread in which he goes up against big, bad Peter David and his legion of ášš-kìššërš. One wonders how he walks what with shooting himself in the foot all the time.
.
He obviously sees this as his big chance to make the cut at TCJ. He’ll fit right in.
.
PAD
My friend, Joe Celko, once told me a story about a sadist who got his jollies by doing nothing at all to a masochist. (I’m sure it wasn’t original, but Celko was the first i remember telling me.)
.
So, maybe if we just ignore ALex…
Yeah, that’s a pretty old gag. “What’s the difference between a sadist and a masochist. The masochist says, ‘Beat me,’ and the sadist says, ‘No.'”
.
The ignoring part isn’t a bad suggestion.
.
PAD
Well, Bill Milligan, if you’re so enraged at being called a sycophant, a good way to avoid that is to stop being a sycophant. You might give it a try.
Jerry Chandler: your timeline is fake and therefor a lie.
PAD:
“We already have a Groth employee chiming in”
–Nov 9 at 10:13 a.m.
Alex:
“Yes, I write a monthly column for a TCJ-hosted blog”
–Nov 9 at 3:27 p.m.
Are you such a fool that you think you can get away with lying about the numbers, even when they’re so easily checked? Apparently so.
As PAD says about you: “With that sort of attention to detail, you, Jerry, have no future at TCJ.”
Exactly, the Journal doesn’t hire liars and incompetents.
It’s one thing to be a troll like PAD and the rest of his bootlickers. It’s quite another to be a stupid troll.
Well, Bill Milligan, if you’re so enraged at being called a sycophant, a good way to avoid that is to stop being a sycophant. You might give it a try.
.
Enraged? By you? It takes effort to be mildly bemused.
.
Exactly, the Journal doesn’t hire liars and incompetents.
.
Huh. And yet, right up there you claim that, when referencing PAD’s opinion of groth’s culpability in all this “Yes, but you confuse incompetence with evil.
.
So TCJ does not hire incompetents, they are just led by one. A subtle but interesting distinction.
.
On one point I think I have to agree with Mr Bucket (“That’s BOUQUET!!!!”). Apparently anyone can be a blogger at the TCJ, it doesn’t make you an employee.
To elaborate: a.m. stands for ante meridien, Latin for before noon. P.m stands for post meridien, Latin for after noon.
3:27p.m. is therefore five hours and fourteen minutes AFTER 10:13 a.m.
Not according to Jerry Chandler and PAD, though:
“Now, in the real world, Nov. 9, 2010 @ 10:13 pm is after Nov. 9, 2010 @ 3:27 pm and not, as you claim, before it.”
I’m not making this up. He really wrote that, and PAD really congratulated him for it.
You guys are such idiots that you can’t even tell the time.
No wonder Sobocinski found it so easy to make a monkey out of you, PAD.
.
Alex, I didn’t write “November 9, 2010 at 10:13 pm” up there, I did a direct copy and paste from the post in question. Here, I’ll do it again.
.
November 9, 2010 at 10:13 pm
http://www.peterdavid.net/index.php/2010/11/05/what-peter-wrote-about-what-he-didnt-write/comment-page-1/#comment-213659
.
There is no “a.m.” in that time stamp. You’re either (1) blind as an f’n bat, (2) you’re dumb as a brick or (3) you’re a liar on top of being an ignorant jáçkášš.
.
I’m betting at this point that the good money is on option 3. You’re a troll. We’re done now. Have fun talking to yourself.
.
Shrouded.
I predict that somewhere below here, Alex will wonder how his post appears after PAD’s. He will also reveal he is posting from Paris. And my powers of precognition will amaze and astound him.
.
Just one last time in case you are just brick stupid and not the jáçkášš and liar you’re working so hard to prove yourself to be.
.
Alex Buchet – November 12, 2010 at 10:56 am: “Then explain, Einstein, how my post appears AFTER PAD’s?
The fact that I’m posting from Paris, France explains all.
Liar yourself.”
.
Oh look, Alex. My reply to you is somehow appearing in the thread before your question to me. Your post made before mine is somehow appearing after How could this possibly be happening unless you’re posting from Paris, France?
.
Well, it might have something to do with the various posts here having their own individual reply functions and you can reply to a specific post that was posted earlier in the thread than the most recent post was. Jerome Maida was the first person to post in this thread way back on the 5th. You can scroll up if you want to or you can just use this link.
.
http://www.peterdavid.net/index.php/2010/11/05/what-peter-wrote-about-what-he-didnt-write/comment-page-1/#comment-210786
.
I could reply to him or Mulligan and have a post responding to you before any post by you appears on this thread. It’s a very simple and basic blog format. A retarded monkey could figure it out so one would think that someone (like, say, you) who writes for a blog might at least notice all of those little “Reply” and figure it out.
.
You’re either a supreme idiot of epic proportions or you’re a jáçkášš and a liar. I’m still putting my money on your being a jáçkášš and a liar, but either way you’re shrouded for good now, Alex.. Have a nice life.
.
Saul, I’ll be really impressed if you can give me tonight’s lotto picks. Don’t worry about the state, give me all of ’em!
You guys are such idiots that you can’t even tell the time.
.
You really don’t get tired of making a fool of yourself, do you?
Then explain, Einstein, how my post appears AFTER PAD’s?
The fact that I’m posting from Paris, France explains all.
Liar yourself.
And here when you said “adios,” I thought it meant something. Yet you’re back.
.
Best of luck with your self-promotion. Or, to put it in a way you’ll understand: Au revoir.
.
PAD
Yet you’re back.
.
Unfortunately, like many who lay claim to the “I’m done with you!” title, he comes back for more. He’s a desperate attention whørë.
.
It’s quite another to be a stupid troll.
.
And yet another altogether to be so blinded by your own inflated ego as to not be able to see the mirror everybody is holding out in front of you.
Alex… as Will Rogers once said, “When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.”
Wow, I really don’t want to look any further than this:
.
http://comicon.com/ubb/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=233546&page=1
.
I really wish the comments that started that thread were still available. But it certainly looks like nothing has changed for ol’ Alex in the last 3 years: everybody else is a liar, targeting somebody’s family, another poster predicting that Alex will talk about timestamps.
.
Looks like history repeats itself on a regular basis when it comes to ol’ Alex.
Good God, Craig. It’s like that thread was everything wrong with the Internet, all in one place. I started getting a headache wallowing through the multiple-Alex parts of it.
.
Shrouded it is. No one needs this.
.
PAD
I can’t believe you actually tried to engage this yahoo in discussion for so very long before shrouding.
.
Of course, I also can’t believe that it went so long without anyone pointing out that the timestamps are applied by the host computer, and don’t vary by the time zone of the poster…
Holy crap. That is seriously unbalanced. Nothing that can be said to someone like that will make the slightest difference.
.
I think I’ve learned a bit from those long ago endless threads with that one guy (Bill and Jerry know who I mean, hopefully the newer folks were spared the pain), specifically that there is nothing to be gained by arguing with people who are either mentally ill or just have that quirk in their psyche that makes them act like the mentally ill when it comes to internet posts. It’s a bit aggravating to be called a bad name by someone who is so…well, make your own conclusions, but since nobody worth worrying about could possibly read these things and conclude in his favor, where is the harm?
.
That thread makes it clear that there is no “adios” to be had from this guy. he will remain, either under his original name or some sockpuppet. Might have to disemvowel him before all is said and done–been a while since there was anyone here that needed that.
“–been a while since there was anyone here that needed that.”
.
Not since late 2007 if I remember right so just about three years.
So, since none of you is able to engage my (admittedly disturbing) questions, you cut and run? Typical.
Again, it’s hilarious to read Peter David sanctimoniously weeping over the horrid incivility of the Internet while acting as a vicious troll.
The whole manufactured bit about my posting my blog writing before PAD’s accusation is typical. Jerry, you showed only that you can insert a reply before the post it responds to. That’s not the case here. My post answering Peter’s appears AFTER his accusation, not BEFORE.
Can you tell the difference between ‘before’ and ‘after’?
Besides, there are four people between his post and my reply:
Jerry
Craig
GM
PAD.
Since you’re on that list, Jerry, the only logical conclusion is that you are deliberately lying.
And, sure, PAD, it’s easy to doctor timestamps when you’re a blog admin. But it’s a pretty contemptible move.
Yup, you and Danny Hellman have lots in common…not something to be proud of.
So, since none of you is able to engage my (admittedly disturbing) questions, you cut and run? Typical.
You lie badly. Typical.
But feel free to stick around and rack up persecution points. People like having sad sacks who crave their bad treatment.
I’d also like to point out that I started posting here perfectly civilly and politely; it’s PAD who started the flaming, and his faithful lynch mob took up the torch.
Pathetic, people. You are quite literally pathetic.
I’m a bit late coming into this thread, but in reading your first posts on it, Alex, I notice these comments by you:
.
Alex Buchet, 11.9.10; 9:20am: I don’t think your loathing for Groth should blind you to the probable truth. BTW, this made you another of her victims.
.
Alex Buchet, 11.9.10; 11:41am: Again, you are blinded by hatred.
.
Alex Buchet, 11.9.10; 3:27pm: The reference to Groth “employees” is pretty pathetic…The disturbing part of your attitude, Mr David, is that you are willing to throw common sense out the window and give a free pass to the woman who exploited you for malignant reasons. But, hey, if that’s the mindset you choose… I’ve got this bridge in Brooklyn that’d make a great investment for you.
These do not seem to be civil comments. Can you point to equivalent comments by Peter or the others here that were made before these ones?
.
You claim hypocrisy because Peter bemoans incivility on the Net. But don’t you think there should be a distinction between those who exhibit the initial, unprovoked non-civil behavior, and those who respond to it by criticizing it (or in some unfortunate cases, reciprocated incivility an understandable reaction)? Who hear has been more impolite than you? Who here has invoked Peter’s family, which was clearly made not because it bore any relevance to the topic, but because it served as a personal taunt? Is this emblematic of the ethical standard you aspire to with your own writing? Would you accept such comments directed at your own family in any other way?
.
In any event, good luck with your writing. Take care.
Btw, when I said I was late coming into this, I don’t mean this thread, since I posted on it above, but rather, the conflict between yourself, Alex, and the others here.
Mr Novi, thank you for a civil comment.
PAD:
‘We already have a Groth employee chiming in.’
An obvious attempt to discredit me with guilt by association. And a falsehood. Mike Weber runs with this:
‘Also interesting is that it took you that long to mention that you have a dog in this fight.’ He then calls me a Groth ‘minion’.
Weber again:
‘You really have no idea how ridiculous you’ve looked from the beginning, and how you’re upping the ludicrousness quotient with everything you say, do you?
.
As i said, you began by sayig “it was probably Sobocinski…” and now it’s “PAD was victimised by Sobocinski…”
.
Dude, it’s okay. We understand that Gary Groth (pitiful excuse for a human being that he is – an opinion that i had formed long before this whole affair originally blew up) is your mentor and the Guiding Light of your journalistic universe.
.
Sad that you could be so deluded, but, hey – there were people who thought that Stalin was a great world leader.’
Now, is there any justification for this sort of flaming and trolling? This is where the lynch-mob took over.
I asked you for comments by Peter and others that were made before the ones by you that I quoted above, in furtherance of your assertion that was “PAD who started the flaming”, as you claimed.
.
But all of these quotes you’ve supplied by Peter and Mike were made after yours. Again, the comments I quoted by you were made on November 9, at 9:20am, 11:41am, and 3:27pm. The ones by Peter and Mike you just quoted above were made November 9 at 7:08pm, 10:13pm, and on November 10 at 7:07am. Thus, the quite incivil comments that I quoted by you were made before they began responding with understandable ire.
.
Again, where are the statements by Peter that illustrate that he was the one that started the flaming? Where are the comments by him or others in which they made allusions to your family?
Luigi, you’re falling prey to the troll. You’ll never get a straight or honest answer. Alex is claiming that Peter’s doctoring timestamps.
Just shroud.
And now I have a new character name for my Troll screenplay…
“Exactly, the Journal doesn’t hire liars and incompetents.”
Except.. they do. Isn’t that your whole point Alex?
Mikael Bergkvist,
“Exactly, the Journal doesn’t hire liars and incompetents.”
.
“Except.. they do. Isn’t that your whole point Alex?”
.
Yes, they obviously do. But judging by his comments here and on the thread Craig was able to unearth, it looks like Mr. Alex is someone below even their standards.
Ho-hum, another gratuitous insult.
Well, at least you aren’t faking time-stamps like Jerry.
No insult intended.
I’m just trying to keep up with what the argument is supposed to be.
Do you know about how the captain of the ship is responsible for his crew? The same applies when running a mag like this.
If what you said is true Groth didn’t keep an eye on his crew, and that’s not exactly high marks.
And in the end, it doesn’t matter, he should have seen the warning signs, as Peter states.
The exact internal machinations doesn’t matter, there’s one publisher, one captain of the ship.
Has there been an appology for the letter affair? Has the culprit you suggest been proven?
If not, there’s one thing only for Peter David to assume, and that is what he has written here.
So, what exactly is your point?
It’s amazingly conveluted and confusing for an external observer.
Mikael, I’ve said all along that Groth demonstrated unforgivable incompetence in the matter; read my postings.
What is flat-out unbelievable is the assertion that Groth forged the letter himself.
That’s all I’m saying– but for saying it, PAD and his posse deluged me with hateful lies and abuse.
“What is flat-out unbelievable is the assertion that Groth forged the letter himself.”
In the light of the evidence avaliable, there are only two things one can assume, one: Groth falsified the letter himself, or, two: that he is completely incompetent.
Peter David simply did Groth a favor by assuming that he isn’t incompetent.
He has behaved and acted as someone reasonably competent in the past, so your assumption has no prior evidence to support it as far as I can tell, which makes it less likely to be true.
Thus, logically, Peters assumption appears more likely.
Bear in mind that I have no information about this whatsoever, I only judge on the avaliable information in a logical fashion.
Peter has made a logical assumption, supported by evidence, and yout reply is sofar mere speculation not even suported by Groth himself, from what I can gather. Has he commented upon this?
Science loves facts, and I’m not sure what insider information you possess in this matter that is of value?
One can assume that you are defending Groth’s honor by trying to finger someone else, as in the case of a certain president, it’s better to be deemed incompetent than evil.. the later is unforgiveable, but not the first.
Comment on this thread at The Hooded Utilitarian:
http://www.tcj.com/hoodedutilitarian/2010/11/utilitarian-review-111410/#comment-13049
One of you guys goes right in to troll…Dave Lister.
Alex,
.
“Tsk, tsk, Mr David.
It’s always sad to see a desperate man.’
.
Please take a look in the mirror.
.
“As your campaign to promulgate your lies has deflated, you’ve become more and more vicious in your posts here.”
.
Excuse me, what LIES has PAD told? With all the available evidence, he simply believes that Groth forged the letter. Given said evidence, it is very likely he is correct. Yet you are determined to have everyone believe that Carol Sobocinski is the culprit. As much as you wish it was so, there is not enough conclusive evidence to state factually or as a matter of law that she forged the letter either. As PAD says, he has no reason to disbelieve Sobocinski nor any reason to believe anything Groth says.
.
So, to sum up in terms even you can understand, PAD believing Sobocinski is innocent and that Groth forged the letter are merely his opinions. they cannot be categorized as lies, because no one has discovered the absolute truth. So for you to call PAD a liar, you really need to have proof to back your claims, which you don’t. Until then, PAD is more than withing his rights to believe Groth is guilty no matter how much mouthing the words “Sobocinski did it” is somehow a magic password that automatically stamps your opinion as fact.
.
“I sympathise: it’s always hard to set up a barrage of lies against a truth-teller, isn’t it?”
.
Who’s a truth-teller? Certainly not the person you see when you look in the mirror, at least regarding this. Your obsession with mouthing “Sobocinski did it” does not change two things:
1.) That is still a unproven opinion.
2.) It does not change the fact that groth acted like an insensitive creep.
Far easier to strike with senseless ad hominem attacks, even though the most clueless reader can see through them in an instant. I dig it,man, I’m there.
The bottom line:
I told the truth.
Peter David lied.
Nothing’ll change that, you know? So continue your incompetent libels, continue to encourage your retinue of ášš-lìçkìņg trolls. Makes no difference.
Little man, I only hope that one day you, or your daughters, awaken to the possibility of an ethical life.
Until then, Peter, thanks for the article fodder.
(Oh…and your pet toady, Mike Weber, still has the permission to bite me.
.
Just give up, Jerome. You basically repeated something I said in my earlier posts and he simply brushed it off as lies. He’s either a world class idiot or a troll or both.
.
Plus ignoring him seems to hurt him and make him more desperate. He’s already fabricating troll posts on the blog he writes for and telling us about it to try and get a rise out of us. Ignoring him, not taking his bait there and letting him scream his inanities at the silence will probably drive him more nuts than anything anyone here does insofar as poking holes in his “logic” and lies.
.
Much easier just to shroud him. Likely more fun as well.
Jerry,
I think you may be correct.
Thanks,
Jerome
My. Freakin’. Holy. Hairy. God.
.
I looked at http://comicon.com/ubb/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=233546&page=1
.
Can anyone supply me with about a gallon of brain bleach, to remove the fulminating horror of Alex Buchet in full, unrestrained, all-out batshit crazy raving psycho mode?
.
After that i’d be inclined to burn any monitor i read anything he wrote on … if i could afford the replacement.
.
He’s reminding me more and more of Terry Austin (not the comics Terry Austin – the usenet troll Terry Austin), whose posts in a thread where anyone dares to hols an opinion at variance with his own progressively get more and more offensive and obscene until everyone killfiles his latest incarnation or deserts the thread … at which point, having created a wasteland, he declares himself the victor.
.
Life’s too short to bûŧŧ hëádš with that kind of jerk.
And, to prove (if proof were needed) that it’s not just comics people who can act thoroughly bûŧŧ-hëádëd, on ZDNet, i find myself involved in another discussion with someone who just doesn’t get the point.
Jerome:
The lies were not regarding David’s delusions about his victimiser, Sobocinski. The lies were that I’m an employee of Groth’s, or that I intend to be one.
Jerry Chandler:
I caught you falsifying the timestamps, so in your place, I’d remain discreet.
Mike:
You’re dredging up a thread from the Gutters, a forum deliberately given over to trolling. I was attacking Danny Hellman, an atrocious individual who has spread libels about me far and wide. I note that you fail to reveal this.
The sum-up of this sorry thread: Pater david is revealed to be a liar, atroll, and a hypocrite.
And he did it all to himself.
You refer to three people, and not one person, unless you are somehow unaware of this.
Because of this, the sum-up of the thread, or Peter, or whatever, doesn’t add upp.
The only accusation that would make any sense is the lying part, but Peter David didn’t lie about you being hired by Groth. He assumed. Just as you assume things not yet confirmed or commented on upon the parties actually involved, regarding Sobocinski.
How are you any better?
Mikael, even after I corrected him on the point of his assumption, he continually repeated it. When that became untenable, he characterised me as sucking up to Groth to get work at Fantagraphics. That was untrue, as well.
Finally– and this is a lie where he is caught red-handed- he (or another admin) altered time-stamps to try to prove I came here to promote my blog.
Here’s the detail:
PAD posts November 9 10.13 pm
I reply to his post. The time stamp says November 9 3.27 pm
How can this be? Jerry says: easy, just click reply and your post goes immediately after whichever post you clicked on.
But the previous post was from Luigi Novi on November 12 at 10.13 pm.
I’m not capable of time travel. I can’t go over two days into the future to reply to a post not yet posted.
Conclusion:
My time stamp was altered.
Who can alter time stamps here?
Only someone with admin powers.
Someone like Peter.
That’s not lying?
“Mikael, even after I corrected him on the point of his assumption, he continually repeated it. When that became untenable, he characterised me as sucking up to Groth to get work at Fantagraphics. That was untrue, as well.”
—
So you feel insulted because you were somehow associated with Groth?
I can understand that.
I would be too.
I guess Peter David could appologize for that.
—
“Finally– and this is a lie where he is caught red-handed- he (or another admin) altered time-stamps to try to prove I came here to promote my blog.
Here’s the detail:
PAD posts November 9 10.13 pm
I reply to his post. The time stamp says November 9 3.27 pm
How can this be? Jerry says: easy, just click reply and your post goes immediately after whichever post you clicked on.
But the previous post was from Luigi Novi on November 12 at 10.13 pm.
I’m not capable of time travel. I can’t go over two days into the future to reply to a post not yet posted.
Conclusion:
My time stamp was altered.
Who can alter time stamps here?
Only someone with admin powers.
Someone like Peter.
That’s not lying?”
—
Even if that was true, I don’t get how any of it could prove that you were promoting your blog, and I don’t understand exactly when that became the focalpoint of the discussion – I thought it was about a letter which Groth should have verified?
Now it’s about timestamps and whatnot?
I’m fairly intelligent, but I haven’t had enough coffee tonight to keep track of all this.
I DID read your post after Peters, so that much of the noise I get, but I don’t see that PAD ever identified you as an employee of Groth, only that he assumed that you had direct ties to Groth, sometime after you appeared on this thread, and being hosted by him is regarded as that, either you like that perception or not, and regardless if you ever met the guy or not.
As a journalist, you would understand this – it’s routinly done all the time, in every type of media there is.
If the mayor of a city own a car once upon a time owned by a mobster, he has ‘ties’ to that mobster, which need to be looked into.
It may be innocent, but it raises questions.
Groth would admit to that much himself.
There has been an employee of Groth here, but I wont single out who, and it’s not referring to you. It’s puzzling that you felt identified as such, and that’s what I’m failing to understand?
The primary concern that spawned the blog entry you came here to comment, is that Peter still has no credibly reason to assume anything other than that Groth falsified the letter. Until Groth claims otherwise and points to another culprit, like Sobocinski.
To my knowledge, he has not.
Alex Buchet: But the previous post was from Luigi Novi on November 12 at 10.13 pm.
Right. That’s because I made that post on November 12 in response to a back-and-forth exchange that began with GM’s post on November 9, 2010 at 11:48 am. This is why all the subsequent posts that are contained within that exchange, apart from the rest of the thread, have borders that are indented to the right from the left margin, just as this one is: It’s what happens when you use the Reply function at the bottom of an already-extant post instead of the Leave a Reply field at the bottom of the webpage. If User X, for example, uses the Leave a Reply field at the bottom after I make this post right here, naturally, it will appear beneath the box that begins with your post right above. But if someone then replies directly to my post here by using “Reply”, it will appear directly underneath my post, in between it User X’s post below it, even though User X’s post was made before it. We see this clearly with the disputed exchange above near the top of this page:
.
-GM’s post, which started that particular exchange, was made at 11:48am.
.
-Peter’s initial one was made at 1:20pm
.
-GM’s response was made at 9:24pm
.
-and Peter’s, in which he made the “chiming in” comment, was made at 10:13pm. Not am. PM. The entire exchange, therefore, follows a typical chronology, right up until the last one in that exchange by me, all without the need to doctor anything. The reason yours is placed chronologically in the middle of that exchange is because you used the Leave a Reply field at the bottom of the page, instead of the Reply function to respond to an individual post directly. Do you understand now?
.
There is no evidence, therefore, of doctoring timestamps, much less that Peter is a liar, hypocrite or troll. He has no history of such behavior, and in any event, a troll is someone who acts in an uncivil or provocative manner with the specific intent of provoking negative reactions in others. Just because you disagreed with Peter or were offended by some of his comments does not mean that this was his intent.
.
Peter has spent years dealing with trolls and others on this site who attack him, without any apparent need to resort to doctoring time stamps. Why would he all of a sudden resort to such a thing with you? When one examines his conduct during this thread versus yours, the latter of which includes allusions to his family, name-calling, and a far lower level of politeness than he’s exhibited, I’m sorry, Alex, but it strains credulity to think that he needs to cheat in order to come off looking better than you, Alex. It simply doesn’t square with the character and personality that he has established to date.
.
In addition, but you also said that Jerry Chandler did this too. How could Jerry do this, when he’s merely a visitor to this site, and has no administrative abilities here?
.
For that matter, what evidence do you have that altering time stamps is something even admins can do? I have admin powers at Wikipedia and Nitcentral and I certainly don’t have the ability to alter time stamps there. (To be fair, I could edit the time signature in an actual Wikipedia post if I wanted to, but every edit is still logged in each page’s History section, which would record both the original post and the edit in which it was altered.) Why assume that admins here have this ability?
.
At best, Peter’s focus on the fact that your blog is hosted by TCJ may have arguably been an ad hominem argument, and if you responded by pointing this out, you’d have been on solid ground, especially when you consider how he has not hesitated to point out ad hominems and other logical fallacies when they are employed against him. But instead, you squandered what credibility you might’ve harbored in this respect by going the route of name-calling, invoking his family, and accusations about time stamp doctoring that you not only didn’t bother establishing could be done, but which are more simply explained by the mere manner in which the different reply methods on this site work.
.
Luigi, just give up. He’s a lying little šhìŧ of a troll who has a history on the web (see the links the others posted above) of pulling this kind of garbage and hitting all the points (being a liar, making comments about people’s daughters, fixating on one or two posts and ignoring everything else to claim what is really isn’t, specific terms for people who disagree with him, claiming timestamps have been messed with, etc, etc, etc..) that he’s hit here and then some.
.
You’ll note in some of the linked threads and the threads linked within those that he even brags about having sock accounts, getting banned and antagonizing people. He’s an ignorant jáçkášš who gets off on this garbage and no amount of reasonable discussion or facts are going to stop him from being a lying little šhìŧ of a troll and an ignorant jáçkášš.
.
Talking to him is a waste of time and bandwidth.
Luigi, seriously, Jerry’s right. The only thing you’re giving him that’s of any interest to him is attention.
.
PAD
So far as i can tell (not knowing the specific software in use) it is not feasible to alter timestamps on posts – i was about to say “not possible”, but, i suppose that someone with admin powers could alter anything in any given post … but i wouldn’t want to be the one having to do it.
,.
As has been pointed out – some forum softwares may get the time from the user’s machine rather than their own server’s clock, which would mean that if a person in London, me in US Eastern Time, and a person in California all posted at the same instant, my post would be time stamped five hours earlier than the one from the Big Black Smoke, and the one from Shaky City would be three hours “earlier” than that.
.
Of course, this would be completely beyond (almost said “behind” – guess i was thinking of the apparent permanent positioning of his head) our troll.
.
Give up – he’s not willing to listen to things like logic or intelligent dissent.
Jerry, yeah i read about as much of some of those threads as i could stand. Brought bad memories.
.
He’s definitely the kind of jerk who thinks “Thank you, sir, may I have another?” is a winning strategy.
test
Luigi, you yourself concede that I used the ‘leave a reply’ field in that post.
But then how is it possible for my reply to appear AFTER Peter David’s?
Jerry said it was because I was using the in-comment reply function.
You can’t have it both ways, you know. Either I used the ‘leave a reply’ field, and therefore I couldn’t post after Peter’s post.
Or I used the ‘reply within comment’ and I impossibly replied to a comment made two days after mine.
Which?
And by the way, have you read what I actually said about his family?
And why are you denying the many, many insults Peter has directed my way?
Luigi, you yourself concede that I used the ‘leave a reply’ field in that post. But then how is it possible for my reply to appear AFTER Peter David’s?
Luigi Novi: Because that’s what the Leave a Reply function does on this site. It creates separate posts that it displays in chronological order, from earliest at the top to the most recent below. Their separate nature is denoted by the fact that the borders of the latter post is not “inside” the former one, but has its own borders of the same width as the first one, with the site’s blue background visible between them as a break.
.
By contrast, when you use the Reply function that’s inside each original post (or the “in-comment” function as you call it), it bundles all the comments made directly to that initial post right after it, even if they are made after ones made with the Leave a Reply function. Just look through this thread or any other on the site to see this. This is what me and the others have been trying to explain to you.
.
Alex: Jerry said it was because I was using the in-comment reply function.
Luigi Novi: No, Jerry never said that, Alex. Scrolling through all of his posts on this page shows that while he did attempt to explain this to you, with his November 12, 2010 11:25am post one being apparently the most relevant (albeit with very heated language, due to his anger/frustration with you), he did not say that *you* were the one who used the in-comment function. What he was trying to explain was that you used the Leave a Reply/i> function, which created a separate, independent post beneath the one you were responding to, and that others who used the in-comment function after you posted your response to the original ended up creating posts that appear in between the original and your response, even though they were made (and correctly time-stamped) after it.
.
Again, let me see if I can try to explain this to you:
.
User 1 makes a post at say, 1:00PM.
.
User 2 uses the Leave a Reply function at 2:00PM at the bottom of the webpage to make separate post to reply to it. Its border width is the same as the original, and the site’s blue background separates the two, denoting this. At least initially, it appears directly below User 1’s post.
.
Now, several hours later, User 3 comes along and uses the in-comment function that’s inside the original post by User 1 to reply to it. He does this at 7:00PM, long after User 2’s reply, but when posted on the page, it appears before it, as post of more narrow width, inside User 1’s original post. Because of this, it appears in between User 1’s post and User 2’s post, even though it was made after User 2’s.
.
Alex Buchet: And by the way, have you read what I actually said about his family?
Luigi Novi: Yes. And my response remains the same, though I will elaborate on it further:
.
His daughters are not relevant to this discussion, and when someone attempts to bring in someone’s loved ones into a discussion where it is not relevant, the appearance that is strongly created—and rightfully so—is that it is done in order to get a personal dig in at one’s opponent, and perhaps even to provoke him. You are at an advantage to do this, because being a public figure about whom a great deal is known, like the various members of Peter’s family, it is easy to bring them up, whereas by contrast, we know next to nothing about you, a degree of anonymity that affords you protection against this tactic (even though Peter, and just about all the regular visitors I’ve come to know to this site, would never stoop to employing it anyway, in my estimation).
.
Your rationalization that you made mention of his daughters in order to comment on a parent’s ethical duties is clearly an attempt to put a euphemistic face on an obviously personal comment, as no one brings up family members during debates, either of the in-person kind or the Internet kind, because again, it’s an extraneous comment that bears no relevance on the person you’re criticizing, much less the substance of their position that you disagree with. If I’m wrong, and your rationale is valid, then wouldn’t the logical extension of this mean that every single post made in dissent or disagreement with someone else, in every debate debate, of any kind, on the Net or elsewhere, could reasonably include a mention of the person’s children as an accepted boilerplate tactic? Again, would this exhibit the proper focus on the pertinent topic at hand, and maintain an elevated level of dignity, civility and character among the participants, or do you think it would simply denote the opposite? In addition to being a cheap shot, it is also a superfluous fifth wheel that would bog down the discussion. Again, if someone made mention of your children whenever you said something that they disagree with or took offense to, would this be justifiable in your opinion? You yourself have made comments during this thread that were as inflammatory or moreso than ones directed at you; does this mean we can question your parenting skills? And if you’re inclined to argue that others did it first, wouldn’t this call your parenting skills into question, given that “He did it first!” isn’t highly regarded as a valid or particularly mature rationale for unethical behavior? If you imagine that each and every one of Peter’s daughters has their eyes peeled to his every word in print and on the Web, and is so impressionable as to be dámņëd from any display of anger or aggression, even in the face of provocation, then wouldn’t they just as well be adversely affected by anyone’s dishonest or unethical behavior, including yours? Are children who read your words not affected by them? Even if you’re not a parent, if you run under the assumption that children are reading this blog, then how do you rationalize your non-civil comments? I mean, I make a point to abstain from certain language and behavior when my nephews visit me, and for that matter, when I’m at someone else’s house or in public around any children. Is it unnecessary for me to do this, because they’re not mine? Your citing this principle, therefore, comes across as arbitrary, rather than one that you genuinely employ to govern your own behavior.
.
The bottom line is that you should not have brought his daughters into this. It’s a cheap shot that shows poor character, and while it may be par for the course among the worst types of people who engage in public discourse, it is not a valid avenue to take for those who aspire to exhibit decency and civility in their dealings with others. If you aspire to exhibit such qualities in your career as a writer, and for that matter, as a person, then I would respectfully opine that you would be best served by abstaining from such comments, and perhaps even admitting here that it was not in the best spirit of debate.
.
Alex Buchet: And why are you denying the many, many insults Peter has directed my way?
Luigi Novi: I have looked through this thread, and read all of Peter’s statements addressed to you, and all of yours to him. I do not see any insults by him to you, let alone “many, many” of them. What I do see is a series of exchanges between you and he that was initially characterized by a difference of opinion regarding the Groth-Sobocinski matter, and then by Peter’s ad hominem remark about how your site being hosted by TCJ in some way was relevant to the position you took here. While it degenerated from there into a heated back-and-forth consisting of highly critical comments from both you directed at each other, the far more vitriolic and inflammatory comments were made by you to Peter, and they indeed began with you, Alex.
.
The only statement by him that I even understand to be regarded by you as an insult rather than heated criticism is the one you explicitly singled out as such, namely, when he referenced your revelation about TCJ hosting your site, which you took as an insinuation that you was trying to hide your connection to the blog. I’ll grant you that I can understand your taking this as an insult. I might’ve done the same, as I’ve been attacked ad hominem before, and indeed, Peter’s fans have themselves been dismissed by Peter’s critics for the same reason. But then, you didn’t cover yourself in glory when you engaged in that same behavior—dismissing everyone on this site as a troll, jackal, bootlicker, sycophant, etc. If you want to maintain the high ground, then do so. It might be lonely, but then again, you might earn the respect of those monitoring the thread. But instead of simply sticking to the assertion that this was an ad hominem comment by him, and the fact that you volunteered nature of your relationship to TCJ without any prompting, you instead sunk not only to the level of similarly poorly-made accusations, but name-calling, insults, and allusions to Peter’s daughters.
.
Here’s what I find when looking through the thread:
Alex’s statements to Peter
.
Again, you are blinded by hatred.
.
The disturbing part of your attitude, Mr David, is that you are willing to throw common sense out the window and give a free pass to the woman who exploited you for malignant reasons. But, hey, if that’s the mindset you choose… I’ve got this bridge in Brooklyn that’d make a great investment for you!
.
I suppose you find that an adequate substitute for thinking…or for merely giving yourself a long, hard look in the mirror.
.
I have no “direct ties to Groth”. I’ve told you that. If you’re offended by my calling you a liar, well– the aforementioned mirror beckons.
.
Get some new reading glasses and peruse what I’ve actually written here. I dared — DARED! — question your paranoid and illogical accusation that he fabricated the phoney letter himself. I also note that you never bothered to reveal to your readers the Carol Sobocinski theft and fraud. Ah, but if you had, they might’ve come to an independent opinion different from yours — and we can’t have that, can we? Mike Weber is a sycophant. Worse– he highlights your hypocrisy. You’ve written at quite a length in your columns bemoaning the lack of civility on the Internet and the omnipresence of trolls. Turns out that trolls who lick your boots are perfectly acceptable to you — as this entire comments section proves. Simple logic…but in this matter, logic and you are long divorced.
.
Tsk, tsk, Mr David. It’s always sad to see a desperate man.
.
Little man, I only hope that one day you, or your daughters, awaken to the possibility of an ethical life.
.
My, my. The jackal pack is out in force. Good mobilisation chops, PAD. Apparently PAD is fine with people forging documents and signing his name to them. Pad: she was laughing at your gullibility when she swore she didn’t do it. About the other lie– that I’m just trying to promote my blog– re-read my posts: I didn’t mention it until PAD insinuated that I was a Groth employee shilling for him. I set the record straight…which didn’t stop PAD from continuing to lie about me. As for mentioning his daughters: as a parent, it is his foremost duty to raise ethical children, and the way to do so is by giving an example of his own ethical conduct. He refuses to do so.
.
You guys are such idiots that you can’t even tell the time. No wonder Sobocinski found it so easy to make a monkey out of you, PAD.
.
Again, it’s hilarious to read Peter David sanctimoniously weeping over the horrid incivility of the Internet while acting as a vicious troll.
.
And here are Peter’s statements to you:
.
Peter’s statements to Alex
But I’ll say this for you, Alex: your ability to spout untruths should certainly groom you for TCJ employ. Unfortunately, as is usually the case with lies, it’s tough to keep track of them, and thus you demonstrably stumble, such as this one:
.
Good heavens, how is it that you’re not writing for TCJ yet?
.
I think the truly sad spectacle is you, actually. As for Groth, he’s done fine defaming himself. He has never needed my help.
.
Well, then keep at it, young man! Continue your unpaid labors and someday you too may be able to fulfill your dream of writing for a magazine that is largely thought of with contempt, when anyone bothers to think of it at all.
.
I honestly don’t think that a drive-by poster who, on the surface, showed up purely to defend the honor of the publisher for the magazine that he wishes upon a star he might get to write for someday gets to throw around the accusation of sycophant.
.
No, no, no…won’t do at all. You’ll never pass muster for TCJ that way. You’ve got the petulance down, but they want arrogance. Nor is there anything original here. Taking straightforward truthful statements and saying they’re lies? Old hat. Declaring that anyone who agrees with an opponent is a toady or bootlicker? So ancient you can hear the creaking in the joints. But keep at it; keep trying to raise your game and you might, just might, get to work for a magazine so popular that there weren’t enough stores interested in ordering it to keep a newsprint edition viable.
.
But I’ll say this for you, Alex: your ability to spout untruths should certainly groom you for TCJ employ. Unfortunately, as is usually the case with lies, it’s tough to keep track of them, and thus you demonstrably stumble, such as this one…
.
I tried to be as open-minded as I could in selecting remarks that could possibly b considered “insults” by both of you, and if you feel I missed anything, feel free to point it out, but as it stands, the comments by you are way more vitriolic, and far more easily classified as “insults”, than Peter’s comments to you.
.
And in case you’re inclined to defend your accusing Peter of being a liar as a legitimate criticism rather than an insult, that accusation is complicated, in my view, by the fact that the notion he expressed that you take umbrage with—that you write for Groth—was not a deliberate and knowing falsehood on Peter’s part, but a misunderstanding. When he learned your site is hosted by TCJ, he incorrectly understood, or misinterpreted that as an indication that you write for him. You corrected him, and to my knowledge, he did not repeat this assertion again after that, but even couched his comments to you in terms of the notion of you writing for Groth one day. By contrast, when he accused you of lying, he provided evidence and/or reasoning to illustrate it (in his November 11, 2:28pm post). You could respond that this was caused on your part by not being as circumspect or careful in examining the posts you were referencing, but if you’re going to insist on this, then it stands to reason that you should afford the same benefit of the doubt to Peter regarding his assertion that you wrote for Groth.
.
All in all regarding the accusation of insults, Alex, consider that the first comments I quoted by you predate Peter’s. Consider also that I didn’t even include your very pejorative comments to people here other than Peter, since I’m making this point in response to your statement about Peter’s insults to you, and not those leveled at you by others, but at the same time, it’s hard to argue that any ire Peter directed towards you might not have been fueled at least in part by those things to you said to others here. The first appearance of the word “troll” that occurs on this page after you first began posting on it, for example, is your November 10, 10:21am post, in which you referred to Peter’s fans who agree with him as the “trolls who lick [his] boots”. (The very first appearance of it, incidentally is in my own November 6, 1:00pm post, but that was before you first appeared in this thread, and it was not directed at you or any other particular visitor here.) Similarly, you made your “bridge in Brooklyn” comment and labeled Peter “Sad, sad, sad”, before anyone else here began responding to you in a more critical or heated tone. In summary, your accusation that Peter leveled “many, many insults” at you does not appear to be supported by the evidence on this thread.
Alex Buchet (From the Newer Commetns page): Apparently, Luigi, you credit me with psychic powers, able to predict what PAD will say hours later!
Luigi Novi: In what way did you do this? I see nothing in the quotes that you provided that indicate any such thing.
.
You indicated at 3:27pm that you wrote a TCJ-hosted blog, and he reacted to it almost seven hours later, at 10:13pm, in which he referenced you as a Groth employee, having incorrectly understood from your post that your writing said blog meant you were employee of his. 3:27pm is not “hours later” than 10:13pm. It’s almost seven hours before.