|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on May 2, 2014 11:56:29 GMT -5
There are a few things I don't get about this: 1. What the hell was Lobdell doing on a panel about queer comics? (I read the whole thing and didn't find a mention of this) 2. He also shows he's a racist with the "squinty Asian eyes" bit. I had no idea Lobdell was that big of a creep. Sheesh. He wrote the infamously bad "Northstar coming out as gay" story in the 90s. For the love of... I of course know of that comic, but I never read it. (My personal Alpha Flight continuity ends with Byrne) That's like inviting Rob Liefeld to join a serious discussion about theology in comics. |
|
|
|
Post by the4thpip on May 2, 2014 11:58:15 GMT -5
He wrote the infamously bad "Northstar coming out as gay" story in the 90s. For the love of... I of course know of that comic, but I never read it. (My personal Alpha Flight continuity ends with Byrne) That's like inviting Rob Liefeld to join a serious discussion about theology in comics. Oh, he also created Bunker, the flamboyantly gay latino teen on his recent Teen Titans clusterf... I mean relaunch. Even though he is a tea party supporter and a sexual harasser, he does not seem to be a homophobe. Just... clumsy around the issue. |
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on May 2, 2014 11:59:59 GMT -5
I wouldn't want this site to become "CBR in exile". It has too much of a negative ring to it. Depends on how you look at it. I see it as "the part of the CBR community which doesn't abide by the because-I-say-so rule". |
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on May 2, 2014 12:00:30 GMT -5
I did see a hilarious video on YouTube where Lobdell tries to interview Rob Liefeld and Liefeld gives him the cold shoulder.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jesse on May 2, 2014 12:36:00 GMT -5
I did see a hilarious video on YouTube where Lobdell tries to interview Rob Liefeld and Liefeld gives him the cold shoulder. Someone linked that video in the old CBR MariNaomi thread. I thought that bit was hilarious. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2014 12:42:31 GMT -5
I think any creator who goes out of their way to interact with fans on a message board are going above and beyond the call of duty, and that's cool. At the same time though, where is the line drawn? Are we allowed to critique the work of a creator on a site where they post? I'm not talking about derailing a thread they're participating in, but just in general. When we have a "Worst comic you like" thread, do we have to leave the names of creators who participate off the list of bad comics? I think directly bickering with or attacking a creator would rightfully be frowned upon, but let's say we're discussing Frank Miller's Holy Terror, what are we allowed to say about that piece exactly? By that extension, actual articles posted by CBR, including the one that caused all this mess, were critiques of the industry, the publishers, the talent, and specific comics and images. Without simply telling a creator he's an idiot, criticizing the work should be fair game. I think my main concern (and I'd suspect Wieland's even if he can't outright say it) is that legitimate creator's will see all the "Greg Land sucks! and "Liefeld is a ridiculous hack!" threads and stay far away. Case in point would be Peter David returning to post in the X-Men forums. I'm a big David fans and would love to read what he has to say. I understand that point of view, but I think an honest review of the product the forum is dedicated to is essential as well. If not I don't see much point in the forum. I mean, I'd rather talk about comics I think are good, but if I read one I don't like I think I should be able to say it. Within reason, without attacking the creator. But even then, in situations where someone like Orson Scott Card is hired to write a story, without a display of public outrage there would be little to no backlash on the publisher. I think a lot of the success in canning that project could possibly be credited to CBR. |
|
|
|
Post by numberthirty on May 2, 2014 13:32:21 GMT -5
That's a good point regarding the layout. So many of these changes seem so arbitrary. I spent most of my time in the Music and TV/Film sub forums, an the Music sub is just gone! Folded into Community when they have a Media category. Bwah? If there are any folks interested, my favorite forum was the old All Purpose Metal thread in the music forum. 200+ pages of discussion and band/song suggestions and names. I archived the entire thing if anyone has an interest. Oh, sorry, should I be posting this sort of thing somewhere else? That was what bothered me the most. I simply pointed out that the new layout was less user friendly, and Jonah said "If you don't want to be a part of it, fine.". He followed up by saying something lines of that it was a shame I was not into building an open/fun/accepting community. I am actually fine with that. I have always tried to be decent to folks on the old board. I would just like the new CBR Forums to copy the layout of the old one. It would make it much simpler to use, and I believe lead to things getting back to normal at a much quicker pace. Mini rant over. Thanks. Edit: To be clear, I did also mention that I thought telling folks how to feel about the changes might not take them where they want to go. That could explain someone getting the impression that I am against an open/fun/accepting community. |
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on May 2, 2014 13:44:02 GMT -5
Honestly, I don't have a problem with any of the changes. "We need this community to not be a place which results in women getting rape threats when they post a critique" strikes me as a laudable goal, and I don't think restarting the boards was over-reacting to the situation. (Rape threats? Hacking into this woman's bank account? Geezus fuck!)
And if less batshit insane comic fan behavior in general is tolerated it might make the forums more worth posting in.
And old threads/content CAN be retrieved, right?
I agree that Jonah and the Mods shoulda just kept the Classic Boards to begin with, but when the problem was pointed out it was, basically, fixed within a couple days. Good enough for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by the4thpip on May 2, 2014 13:49:13 GMT -5
Honestly, I don't have a problem with any of the changes. "We need this community to not be a place which results in women getting rape threats when they post a critique" strikes me as a laudable goal, and I don't think restarting the boards was over-reacting to the situation. (Rape threats? Hacking into this woman's bank account? Geezus fuck!) And if less batshit insane comic fan behavior in general is tolerated it might make the forums more worth posting in. And old threads/content CAN be retrieved, right? I agree that Jonah and the Mods shoulda just kept the Classic Boards to begin with, but when the problem was pointed out it was, basically, fixed within a couple days. Good enough for me. To me, it's more like making people give up hand sanitizers, diet coke and cup cakes at the airport after 9-11. It's security theater that does nothing to improve the situation, but creates the illusion of making sweeping changes that will really help. All that was really needed was better moderation and clearer guidelines. Deleting all the old, badly moderated threads along with all the good, useful threads from the past decade will sever to do one thing, though: Sweep CBR's accountability under the rug. |
|
|
|
Post by BigPapaJoe on May 2, 2014 13:59:32 GMT -5
When I pointed out to Weiland on the now deleted "no thanks" thread that the new sign-up process required people to impossibly state they had read terms of service they could not read until they had signed up, he within seconds replied that I was wrong in a rather rude way. A few seconds later, he had edited that to thanking me for pointing out a technical error, but somebody had already quoted him. Weiland's edited post did not carry the usual "last edited by..." stamp. At this point, he is so angry he should have some other mods take over for a couple of days and go to a spa or something. He already banned several posters who agreed with the move (Jared) and/or were even actively sucking up to him (End of Time). This might get worse. See, this is what I'm talking about. It's one thing to enforce rules, but it's another to not be able to admit to a mistake because you're so drunk with power you could possibly do no wrong. I just love how he tried to hide the "last edited by" stamp. Because he's the head mod and could NEVER make a mistake. Kind of just a bitch move. I'm surprised he didn't edit the post that was quoted by someone else. |
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on May 2, 2014 14:05:54 GMT -5
To me, it's more like making people give up hand sanitizers, diet coke and cup cakes at the airport after 9-11. It's security theater that does nothing to improve the situation, but creates the illusion of making sweeping changes that will really help. All that was really needed was better moderation and clearer guidelines. Deleting all the old, badly moderated threads along with all the good, useful threads from the past decade will sever to do one thing, though: Sweep CBR's accountability under the rug. Maybe it will really help? I'm willing to give it a chance. And the fact that the old threads are still there if somebody needs 'em does a lot, in my eyes, to lessen the severity of the change-over. |
|
|
|
Post by numberthirty on May 2, 2014 14:09:26 GMT -5
All that was really needed was better moderation and clearer guidelines. Deleting all the old, badly moderated threads along with all the good, useful threads from the past decade will sever to do one thing, though: Sweep CBR's accountability under the rug. I tend to agree. The logical move would have been along the lines of what you are saying with a warning of wiping the board and starting from scratch if things did not improve. |
|
|
|
Post by the4thpip on May 2, 2014 14:09:45 GMT -5
To me, it's more like making people give up hand sanitizers, diet coke and cup cakes at the airport after 9-11. It's security theater that does nothing to improve the situation, but creates the illusion of making sweeping changes that will really help. All that was really needed was better moderation and clearer guidelines. Deleting all the old, badly moderated threads along with all the good, useful threads from the past decade will sever to do one thing, though: Sweep CBR's accountability under the rug. Maybe it will really help? I'm willing to give it a chance. And the fact that the old threads are still there if somebody needs 'em does a lot, in my eyes, to lessen the severity of the change-over. You do realize they'll be gone in 13 days? And then copies may be on private hard drives, but no longer on the Internet unless somebody decides to host them. And when I suggested we do a kickstarter to finance hosting for the old threads for a decade, Weiland answered: That will never happen. He does not want those threads on the internet, where people can google them. |
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on May 2, 2014 14:17:47 GMT -5
I'm surprised he didn't edit the post that was quoted by someone else. Don't be, those who often make mistakes, are also know for not being overly meticulous. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2014 14:20:51 GMT -5
Maybe it will really help? I'm willing to give it a chance. And the fact that the old threads are still there if somebody needs 'em does a lot, in my eyes, to lessen the severity of the change-over. You do realize they'll be gone in 13 days? And then copies may be on private hard drives, but no longer on the Internet unless somebody decides to host them. And when I suggested we do a kickstarter to finance hosting for the old threads for a decade, Weiland answered: That will never happen. He does not want those threads on the internet, where people can google them. belongs to a cult that believes the world will cease existing in 13 days, anyway. |
|
