With Great Power...

[Orlog]

[align=center][/align]

 

Admittedly, I kind of winced when I seen this. I mean no offense, but why Superman? I've honestly never been able to understand people's interest in him. Let's be honest, he's a plot device of a character, claiming to have this golden compass of a morality code, but in all honesty, when do you actually see him doing things other than fighting of meteors and strange super beings? It's almost like the little stuff like purse snatching and murderers are too beneath him to bother with.

 

So, is it just because you grew up with him? What is it that you like? Tell me; I NEED TO KNOW.

[Grott]

 

Admittedly, I kind of winced when I seen this. I mean no offense, but why Superman? I've honestly never been able to understand people's interest in him. Let's be honest, he's a plot device of a character, claiming to have this golden compass of a morality code, but in all honesty, when do you actually see him doing things other than fighting of meteors and strange super beings? It's almost like the little stuff like purse snatching and murderers are too beneath him to bother with.

 

So, is it just because you grew up with him? What is it that you like? Tell me; I NEED TO KNOW.

 

EVEN THOUGH I HONOR YOU, GUILDY, I'm going to have to disagree here.

 

I used to feel the same way about Superman as you, and it's kind of hard to define his appeal in a few short sentences. I can definitely recommend some reading though that might change your opinion of him. Kingdom Come and Superman/Batman: The Search For Kryptonite are both outstanding reads. Really the entire Superman/Batman series that Jeph Loeb started is nothing short of amazing. Superman: Earth One also puts the character in a better perspective. I will say this, in your defense, he is very difficult to write well. Most writers fail miserably with Superman because they can't seem to give him character beyond "I'm good." But, when he's done well, he's done very well.

 

When creating Uther, I had the same issue. I thought "well, he's a 'good guy'.. now what?" and I actually had to re-read those comics I just named and a few others to get inspiration on how to make him more than just a one-dimensional 'good guy'. 

 

Sorry that was kind of void of any real argument, but it's difficult to explain. I highly suggest reading those comics. Kingdom Come is one of my personal favorites because it has the same "Classic super hero tale flipped on its head" vibe that Watchmen has, though in a very different way. It asks a lot of questions about how to handle super criminals and what really makes a super hero a super hero.

[Black]

[align=center][/align]

 

 

Admittedly, I kind of winced when I seen this. I mean no offense, but why Superman? I've honestly never been able to understand people's interest in him. Let's be honest, he's a plot device of a character, claiming to have this golden compass of a morality code, but in all honesty, when do you actually see him doing things other than fighting of meteors and strange super beings? It's almost like the little stuff like purse snatching and murderers are too beneath him to bother with.

 

So, is it just because you grew up with him? What is it that you like? Tell me; I NEED TO KNOW.

 

I am going to take a different approach from what many people that reply to you said and assume you won't pick up these issues (or the recent animated DVD movies that are based on them) and just answer you...although this is my perspective.

 

To me, Superman isn't a favorite/favorite, but he is still pretty high on the list of characters I like.

 

I come at him from a different angle (and some of this is covered under All-Star Superman series).

 

Superman is basically a man, with the powers of a god, that wants to be a normal man. Since he can't be that, he takes up the responsibility to use his powers for the greater good of mankind and doesn't impose himself on others.

 

There is a common failing in many folks and the saying of, "Power corrupts...." and that is not true with Superman. He is a role model of non-corruption, or tries to be. He is not always perfect, but tows the line and doesn't let his power color his view of himself. Really, in his inner monologue to himself, he considers himself, "Clark" (or "Clark Kent"). He is not "Superman" or even "Kal-El". He is "Clark". A country boy raised by good parents who respects his fellow men and does not impose his own will or law on them. He is something to strive for. A role-model. Sometimes, even with someone with his powers, it is very hard to respect others as he does and that is part of the character. A guy that wants to be a guy, but can't.

 

Admittedly, he can be hard to write for, but when someone writes him well, he "sings".

 

And really, like I said, I really enjoy him and appreciate him, and I am more into "anti-heroes" (I think you also stated as such, too).

 

To me, he is in a different class of character and I have room for all varieties.

 

 

 

:ahriman::bomb:

[Grott]

 

I am going to take a different approach from what many people that reply to you said and assume you won't pick up these issues (or the recent animated DVD movies that are based on them) and just answer you...although this is my perspective.

 

To me, Superman isn't a favorite/favorite, but he is still pretty high on the list of characters I like.

 

I come at him from a different angle (and some of this is covered under All-Star Superman series).

 

Superman is basically a man, with the powers of a god, that wants to be a normal man. Since he can't be that, he takes up the responsibility to use his powers for the greater good of mankind and doesn't impose himself on others.

 

There is a common failing in many folks and the saying of, "Power corrupts...." and that is not true with Superman. He is a role model of non-corruption, or tries to be. He is not always perfect, but tows the line and doesn't let his power color his view of himself. Really, in his inner monologue to himself, he considers himself, "Clark" (or "Clark Kent"). He is not "Superman" or even "Kal-El". He is "Clark". A country boy raised by good parents who respects his fellow men and does not impose his own will or law on them. He is something to strive for. A role-model. Sometimes, even with someone with his powers, it is very hard to respect others as he does and that is part of the character. A guy that wants to be a guy, but can't.

 

Admittedly, he can be hard to write for, but when someone writes him well, he "sings".

 

And really, like I said, I really enjoy him and appreciate him, and I am more into "anti-heroes" (I think you also stated as such, too).

 

To me, he is in a different class of character and I have room for all varieties.

 

 

 

:ahriman::bomb:

 

Yeah, that's a pretty good explanation right there. I love Superman.

[Shuck]

Yeah, that's a pretty good explanation right there. I love Superman.

 

FINALLY! I have someone to argue about Superman with!

 

Ok. So. Counterpoint on Superman:

 

Even when he's written "well", there's something about this character that irks the crap out of me. Mostly in that he's named himself the absolute arbiter of justice. Everywhere. Forever. With no attention paid to whatever personal shortcomings he's got.

 

To say his power simply doesn't color his perceptions of the world is a massive oversight. Every day, Superman picks and chooses who he does, and does not save. A man who could be just about everywhere at once, and he'll skip right over you if he feels like it. Sure, he's made it a point to stop a sad girl from jumping off a building. But how many people in Metropolis were murdered in range of his super-hearing at that moment? He catches a plane, but makes no effort to say...keep that security guard facing down Lex Luthor's secret Spec Ops crew from getting gunned down and dissolved in super-acid later.

 

Perhaps my biggest issue with Superman is that he's reactive, rather than proactive. He doesn't really prevent these disasters from happening. He just handicaps our ability to handle them by swooping in and doing it all for us. Superman's actions show something that writers never out and out say: He doesn't trust us for shit. He's gonna tell us what's right. He's gonna tell us who gets to be saved, and who doesn't. He's gonna tell us when we need him, and when we don't.

 

Honestly, I find myself in the same boat as Mr. Luthor. I look at him, and I think "Who asked you?"

 

And, now a segway into thoughts on Rorschach, 'cause he poses a question I think we should all ask about Superman (And Batman, frankly):

 

Rorschach asks the audience, quite plainly, if we really want someone with an unwavering moral compass. Someone who doesn't see grey. Someone who decides that they know better than anyone around them.

 

Rorschach, like Superman, forges on without turning any of his thoughts inward, and it destroys countless lives. Did the child murderer he butchered deserve to be punished? Sure, but nobody deserves to be hacked to bits by a madman in possibly the coolest mask ever. This is the road that heroes like Superman and Batman are on. Particularly the former. Superman can get away with just about anything. The fact that he hasn't yet is pretty much just luck. After all, he has a human psyche. He doesn't have a super-strong sense of identity, or an unending reserve of mental resilience. He can't choose not to be scarred by trauma without diving into a world of utter fantasy. He's well beyond genius-level as far as intellect is concerned, but that comes with it's own set of issues, not the least of which would be his ability to actually relate to the people he's trying to protect.

 

And we see these same sorts of things come back and bite Rorschach in every way possible. He's a smart guy, and his ability to recall events and bridge logical gaps just means that his trauma and stresses dig that much deeper. His moral compass is unwavering, but that leaves him unable to adapt to a changing world. He's named himself the absolute authority on right and wrong, and that makes him a monster.

 

You guys. Guys. Seriously. I am so happy to argue about comic characters right now.

[Black]

Yeah, that's a pretty good explanation right there. I love Superman.

 

FINALLY! I have someone to argue about Superman with!

 

Ok. So. Counterpoint on Superman:

 

Even when he's written "well", there's something about this character that irks the crap out of me. Mostly in that he's named himself the absolute arbiter of justice. Everywhere. Forever. With no attention paid to whatever personal shortcomings he's got.

 

To say his power simply doesn't color his perceptions of the world is a massive oversight. Every day, Superman picks and chooses who he does, and does not save. A man who could be just about everywhere at once, and he'll skip right over you if he feels like it. Sure, he's made it a point to stop a sad girl from jumping off a building. But how many people in Metropolis were murdered in range of his super-hearing at that moment? He catches a plane, but makes no effort to say...keep that security guard facing down Lex Luthor's secret Spec Ops crew from getting gunned down and dissolved in super-acid later.

 

Perhaps my biggest issue with Superman is that he's reactive, rather than proactive. He doesn't really prevent these disasters from happening. He just handicaps our ability to handle them by swooping in and doing it all for us. Superman's actions show something that writers never out and out say: He doesn't trust us for shit. He's gonna tell us what's right. He's gonna tell us who gets to be saved, and who doesn't. He's gonna tell us when we need him, and when we don't.

 

Honestly, I find myself in the same boat as Mr. Luthor. I look at him, and I think "Who asked you?"

 

And, now a segway into thoughts on Rorschach, 'cause he poses a question I think we should all ask about Superman (And Batman, frankly):

 

Rorschach asks the audience, quite plainly, if we really want someone with an unwavering moral compass. Someone who doesn't see grey. Someone who decides that they know better than anyone around them.

 

Rorschach, like Superman, forges on without turning any of his thoughts inward, and it destroys countless lives. Did the child murderer he butchered deserve to be punished? Sure, but nobody deserves to be hacked to bits by a madman in possibly the coolest mask ever. This is the road that heroes like Superman and Batman are on. Particularly the former. Superman can get away with just about anything. The fact that he hasn't yet is pretty much just luck. After all, he has a human psyche. He doesn't have a super-strong sense of identity, or an unending reserve of mental resilience. He can't choose not to be scarred by trauma without diving into a world of utter fantasy. He's well beyond genius-level as far as intellect is concerned, but that comes with it's own set of issues, not the least of which would be his ability to actually relate to the people he's trying to protect.

 

And we see these same sorts of things come back and bite Rorschach in every way possible. He's a smart guy, and his ability to recall events and bridge logical gaps just means that his trauma and stresses dig that much deeper. His moral compass is unwavering, but that leaves him unable to adapt to a changing world. He's named himself the absolute authority on right and wrong, and that makes him a monster.

 

You guys. Guys. Seriously. I am so happy to argue about comic characters right now.

 

:sigh:

 

While some messages have gone a bit off-topic, this is a thread about "elevating" favorites, not pointing out flaws or denigrating one's you may not like.

 

Sometimes it is a personal choice what one likes or does not like. I may pick apart your post, but this needs to be in another thread on its own (IMO). It should not be here, where people named their favorites and someone asked *why* do some people favor Superman.

 

:ahriman::ahriman:

[Ryanti]

I'm not really that geeky about super heroes. Not as much as other people are. But I'll put in my brief two cents.

 

 

In today's time, people are more focused on depth and gray morality when it comes to super heroes. They want to see open flaws that are easy to spot, or.. challenges that heroes overcome.

 

Superman was the first super hero ever made. In the time he was made, everything when it came to entertainment for young children was over the top. Superman is what he is. Super. He is a higher being then a human, being an alien, which at the time was a plot device designed to allow Superman be better then a person for not being human in the first place... so therefore, he is Super.

 

When you deal with Superman, beyond the tons and tons of Kripton/alien/scientific lore that he has now, he is the most traditional superhero. Therefore, when it comes to his personality and his demeanor, he is rather, well.. traditional.

 

Superman is very good at defining the ideal image of a super being. It's just going out of style nowadays because people desire more complicated heroes whom are neither not super, or.. not heroes, or.. struggling to deal with the issues of being a hero.

 

Superman is more of a person that people are supposed to look up to rather than relate to. That's how he was designed as a character, and it is pretty much what he represents. He's idealistic.

 

Some people believe he's one dimensional. But if you're a real comic book nerd and look things up and such, Superman himself is rather an intriguing character. He's just a little bit harder to appreciate then other heroes, because we see this big one dimensional aura about him after being exposed to all these other heroes.

 

I remember people saying the same thing about Captain America in the Avengers movie. I think it was just, once again, because he was the traditional one.

 

I like Superman because he reminds me of back in the day when things were more straightforward, and he's sort of a person who's.. mannerisms are quite literally super. A God among men. It pulls at the child in me that just says "You know what, I just want to see a person made out of the epitome of awesome beat the living shit out of bad guys."

[Havoc Snow]

Firstly...

 

 

 

 

Then secondly...

 

 

 

 

and finally...

 

 

 

 

Super Dickery...

[Ellie]

Firstly...

 

 

 

 

Then secondly...

 

 

 

 

and finally...

 

 

 

 

Super Dickery...

 

O________O

[D R E N]

Firstly...

 

 

 

 

 

Then secondly...

 

 

 

 

 

and finally...

 

 

 

 

 

Super Dickery...

 

 

Superman, you're a monster!

[Skyborn]

Ryanti, I agree on every point. Superman is usually the first person anyone thinks of when you mention the term 'superhero'. His powers are admittedly over the top, but they're there to help paint the picture. Superman is more than human. He's something to strive to be. He's good, he's kind, he's selfless, he's a protector...things that, back in the day when he was made, was something that inspired awe in folks. And in today's day and age gives us something to look up to. A symbol of what we could do and be if we just tried. I'm not talking about the super powers (though that would be killer. Do a good deed, get super speed), but what he accomplishes. It's a big metaphor. It's hard to relate to a God among men, but you can look up to one. Uther has it right, though, Superman Earth 1 makes him more of a relatable, Human feeling character. (I personally love Earth 1. Makes Superman more of a believable Hero. Not 6'5'' and massively bulky despite being an awkward nerd in glasses. He's like...5'10" and could arguably hide his muscle tone under the cardigan and button down he wears)

 

I like Superman (and Captain America) because he is that traditional Superhero. Doing good. Righting wrongs. Standing for positive morals. It's something that gets lost in comics these days when it's popular to make things racier and edgier.

 

Er...I mean...kupo!

[Havoc Snow]

 

 

 

*just... leaves this here for folks...*

[Kyatai]

 

 

 

 

*just... leaves this here for folks...*

Is scarred. For Life.

:cry:

[Shuck]

:sigh:

 

While some messages have gone a bit off-topic, this is a thread about "elevating" favorites, not pointing out flaws or denigrating one's you may not like.

 

Sometimes it is a personal choice what one likes or does not like. I may pick apart your post, but this needs to be in another thread on its own (IMO). It should not be here, where people named their favorites and someone asked *why* do some people favor Superman.

 

:ahriman::ahriman:

 

What? Are you kidding me right now? You can't handle a discussion on why/why not as the natural evolution of a conversation? It's not like there was even any back-and-forth on the matter, we just stated our opinions one way or the other, and I'm quite sure everyone was prepared to move on.

 

I sincerely can't even fathom the kind of mindset where you can make up denigration in a post that borrows actual events from the comic character in question. That's not unfair criticism! That's an example! You've even used the wrong accusation in your made-up complaint.

 

It's like you honestly believe that being disagreed with makes you some kind of victim, deserving of special treatment. It doesn't. It means that someone disagrees with you, and eventually (maybe not here, maybe not in the next internet clubhouse any one of us signs up to), you're gonna have to learn to deal with it.

 

Christ on a cracker.

 

On topic (OH NO, HERE COMES SOME MORE DISAGREEMENT! HUDDLE IN YOUR SHELTERS!):

 

I like Superman (and Captain America) because he is that traditional Superhero. Doing good. Righting wrongs. Standing for positive morals. It's something that gets lost in comics these days when it's popular to make things racier and edgier.

 

There's a problem with this comparison. Steve Rogers (the original Captain America) was a soldier. He didn't claim that he always knew what was right and wrong, and he in fact didn't have the ability to enforce his personal viewpoint everywhere on the globe, at once. Rogers had things he believed were right, and he tried to keep himself and those around him on the right track.

 

He didn't always succeed. And that's a crazy-important differentiation.

 

Superman could be likened to a tyrant. His power is absolute. Therefore, his will in any matter he involves himself in is absolute. What he considers right? Well, not everybody would agree, but that's too bad, because he is the Sun God, and you will obey him, or he'll ruin your shit in ways you can't even imagine.

 

Let's take, for example, his adherence to Truth and Justice. Already, he's a hypocrite on the first count. His life is a lie. Like...actually a lie. It's bullshit, he's not Clark Kent, a normal motherfucker like you and me. He's Superman. He doesn't need to go to work. He doesn't really need to do anything, but just be who he is. If he's willing to impose that double-standard, what else might he be a hair's width away from doing?

 

Them's prospects I do not like.

[Grott]

I hope you're all not genuinely suggesting that we keep using this thread if we want to discuss Superman, as not to offend people.

 

It's Superman. If you're past the age of six and you get offended when people trash talk Superman, you've got a problem.

 

I'll be on the old thread, discussing Superman if anyone needs me.

[Black]

 

What? Are you kidding me right now? You can't handle a discussion on why/why not as the natural evolution of a conversation? It's not like there was even any back-and-forth on the matter, we just stated our opinions one way or the other, and I'm quite sure everyone was prepared to move on.

 

I sincerely can't even fathom the kind of mindset where you can make up denigration in a post that borrows actual events from the comic character in question. That's not unfair criticism! That's an example! You've even used the wrong accusation in your made-up complaint.

 

It's like you honestly believe that being disagreed with makes you some kind of victim, deserving of special treatment. It doesn't. It means that someone disagrees with you, and eventually (maybe not here, maybe not in the next internet clubhouse any one of us signs up to), you're gonna have to learn to deal with it.

 

Christ on a cracker.

 

On topic (OH NO, HERE COMES SOME MORE DISAGREEMENT! HUDDLE IN YOUR SHELTERS!):

 

 

First of all, I was gonna answer, I just did not think the previous thread was the right place for it, because it is titled, "Favorite Comic Heroes" and here you are criticizing a chosen favorite of some who have chosen him. That is all. I believe for the good of the topic, that this should be in another thread and frankly, it seems like I am not alone.

 

You choose to personally attack me and choose to read into my statement that I will "huddle in a shelter" as you huff and puff about the topic. I did not question your stance on it but you choose to question mine as you, quite possibly, gleefully do not consider the reasons people like Superman and squash their world to conform to your own view. Again, this is another reason I asked this to be moved.

 

And I've been in more flame wars since flame wars was a term. I am not moved by your stance or your debate style to throw my and others views into question. From what I probably understand about you, you really have not read and considered the points in our posts but have decided to pursue your own agenda. If you are a true debater, you do not attack the speaker, you attack the issues.

 

Really, I had seen the new thread last night and was going to respond to your initial posts as I signed on, which I see with its own faults and hypocritical points, but I don't feel I should be feeding you or your epitaphs to saltine products or people named Christopher. I feel any discourse would be lost at this point in time. Maybe I am wrong or maybe you can calm down and calmly debate instead of being so over-zealous and acting on assumptions.

 

These are things heroes do not do, at least in my book.

[Black]

I hope you're all not genuinely suggesting that we keep using this thread if we want to discuss Superman, as not to offend people.

 

It's Superman. If you're past the age of six and you get offended when people trash talk Superman, you've got a problem.

 

I'll be on the old thread, discussing Superman if anyone needs me.

 

I will also state something here:

 

You and I and even the person who started this whole thing are quite passionate people in our likes for certain characters. Even if this turned out to be a reasonable debate (and it hasn't had that effect already IMO), I could see the previous thread devolving into a "Superman debate thread" very easily as we pick apart things point by point.

 

While I am generally alright with off-topicness and I do it myself, as I said, the previous thread is about "celebrating your favorites" and not criticizing others because of their choice of favorites. And really, this may not stop at one character, but turn into a debate about others as well. IMO, the very first post wasn't as much as an open debate, but struck me as an "O-boy-O-boy! I can't wait to win converts to my side even though I should respect people have different perspectives!" Perhaps that is a false view on my end, but that poster seems to be spoiling for fight or debate that can easily go on for pages upon pages as neither side is going to be convinced. I am sure he will not be convinced, given his wording and I will not be convinced.

 

So between all the postings of favorites, we are going to have this on-going debate which, I feel, would drive away a few posters who would want to post up a hero and why they like it (without someone tearing down their position as to WHY they like their particular hero).

 

Not everyone likes Strawberries, folks. Some prefer Raspberries and that's how it is. Peoples tastes and perspectives will be different. I hope I am not the only one that appreciates that fact and sees someone who may not but wishes to push a debate without seeing the possibility of a thread devolving into pure debate as these types of posts take it over.

[Shuck]

 

First of all, I was gonna answer, I just did not think the previous thread was the right place for it, because it is titled, "Favorite Comic Heroes" and here you are criticizing a chosen favorite of some who have chosen him. That is all. I believe for the good of the topic, that this should be in another thread and frankly, it seems like I am not alone.

 

Yeah, ad populatum is a great way to prove a point. Except that it proves absolutely nothing. I'm not alone in my thoughts either. Does that make me right?

 

Anyway, your original point was that the criticisms were unfair. They aren't. They're taken from actual examples of the character in question. Your point is, therefore, rendered invalid.

 

You choose to personally attack me and choose to read into my statement that I will "huddle in a shelter" as you huff and puff about the topic. I did not question your stance on it but you choose to question mine as you, quite possibly, gleefully do not consider the reasons people like Superman and squash their world to conform to your own view. Again, this is another reason I asked this to be moved.

 

Buddy, nothing in anything I've said has even suggested that people must conform. You're making things up again. You're making up an argument that isn't there. You want to talk about debate rules? That's cool. This is a strawman fallacy.

 

I don't have to consider how "squashed" you might feel in a discussion in which I disagree with your point of view. Disagreeing with you is not a personal attack, no matter how much you may wish it was (because that would lend you validity that you just kind of don't have here.) If you don't like my points? Throw up some counter-points! That's how discussions work.

 

If you don't have any (which it appears as if you don't, and are unfamiliar with the rules that you're claiming to follow), then don't bother.

 

And I've been in more flame wars since flame wars was a term. I am not moved by your stance or your debate style to throw my and others views into question. From what I probably understand about you, you really have not read and considered the points in our posts but have decided to pursue your own agenda. If you are a true debater, you do not attack the speaker, you attack the issues.

 

Super impressed by your internet experience.

 

I would like to walk you down what was said, now. Because there's a disconnect here. Let me bridge that for you, as you don't understand jack, and are guilty of the exact thing that you're (baselessly) accusing me of. Which is it's own special kind of hilarious.

 

Anyway, onward:

 

Here's my post. Click these words to read it again, because you didn't read it the first time!

 

Here's how I know you didn't read it: It actually contains a tie-in to a seconding of a favorite comic book hero of mine. That's what we call a cohesive argument. We address the issue being discussed currently (in this case, directly speaking Uther on the matter of Superman), and we latch that right onto the main point of the post.

 

You ignored that, opting instead to feign some kind of exasperation with the very idea that someone doesn't agree with you about a fictional alien from a comic book. Frankly, I don't know why you, or anyone would waste their time and energy on thumbing their nose at a civil discussion with a point/counter-point style of presentation, but you are, evidently, far too experienced and practiced at this here internet for any of us to comprehend what you're getting at (Spoiler: It's nothing. You've got nothing.)

 

You offered nothing to the conversation at hand (which you could have, if you understood how discussions work), and instead decided to complain, in this very post that I'm addressing, that you feel "squashed". Do you sincerely think you're taking a stand for someone here? Who might they be? Because the guy engaged in the conversation with me was having a blast. We continued it in Skype for hours. Ask him! He'll tell you!

 

Then we get to my earlier response to you. And it was a response. Not an attack, a response. They're different. With the situation I have on hand, that of course being:

 

:sigh:

 

While some messages have gone a bit off-topic, this is a thread about "elevating" favorites, not pointing out flaws or denigrating one's you may not like.

 

Sometimes it is a personal choice what one likes or does not like. I may pick apart your post, but this needs to be in another thread on its own (IMO). It should not be here, where people named their favorites and someone asked *why* do some people favor Superman.

 

:ahriman::ahriman:

 

I can only wonder how it is someone arrives at the idea that discussion of any sort, on a forum, that isn't explicitly about the topic proposed in the title (no matter how closely related it may be) is not to be tolerated in a thread.

 

Why can't people ask "why"? Why don't you want them to ask "why"? Why does it appear as if you can't handle the very notion that someone would ask "why"?

 

Why does it appear as if you can't handle someone disagreeing with you?

 

Hell, while we're at it, why don't you adhere to the rules of debate and discussion?

 

 

 

Really, I had seen the new thread last night and was going to respond to your initial posts as I signed on, which I see with its own faults and hypocritical points, but I don't feel I should be feeding you or your epitaphs to saltine products or people named Christopher. I feel any discourse would be lost at this point in time. Maybe I am wrong or maybe you can calm down and calmly debate instead of being so over-zealous and acting on assumptions.

 

These are things heroes do not do, at least in my book.

 

The worst part about this is that you think it's clever.

 

Also, you haven't actually pointed out any hypocrisy (I dare you to do it), which makes this accusation baseless. These aren't assumptions, as I'm drawing from the events as they happened, so that accusation is baseless. An epitaph is a poem written in memory of the deceased, or an etching on a tombstone, so that's just straight-up wrong, and it'd only take you like a second to google the words you're attempting to use in order to appear as if you've got a grasp on what it is you're saying (you don't).

 

The discourse was calm and reasonable before you, and whoever else, started bellyaching over someone not liking your pretend hero. I don't care if you're moved. I don't care if you feel squashed. I don't care what you imagined might happen in the other thread, because I honestly don't believe you have the predictive capability to see into the future.

 

Seriously, you can't even string together a cogent argument as to why you started wailing to begin with.

 

Oh, and here's another hint: In order for your point to be cogent, it's gonna need some facts and examples. You get to that, ok? Or don't. I guess you've got a doctorate in "Internet", and are therefore entirely above things like "making points".

 

Mean time, I'm gonna go discuss Superman in the other thread with Uther. And I'm gonna disagree with him. And we're still gonna have a good time with it.

[Orlog]

As the creator of the thread, it wasn't intended to be a "feel all happy" thread, where no actual discussion takes place (seeing that disagreements are a natural part of discussion.). But then again, with any thread that's made, I actually want people to engage each other, ask questions, disagree and say why, not just stand around telling everyone how awesome their ideas and opinions are. That's boring and no one grows from that shit.

 

Plus, people derailing from threads happen all the time without the mods having the step in. The only time it becomes a problems is when people start shouting about how their feelings are hurt, especially when no one involved is being even kind of hostile. It's getting tiring and honestly, I'm starting to lose a lot of respect for this place.

 

Can't even have a light hearted disagreement about fuckin' Superman... Seriously.

[Black]

 

 

Yeah, ad populatum is a great way to prove a point. Except that it proves absolutely nothing. I'm not alone in my thoughts either. Does that make me right?

 

Anyway, your original point was that the criticisms were unfair. They aren't. They're taken from actual examples of the character in question. Your point is, therefore, rendered invalid.

 

Excuse me. That was nowhere near my original post. Again, you are not reading, so why debate you? My original post was, "Okay, you want to have a debate? Please let's just move this topic to a new one." Maybe this concept is hard to grasp, because mouse-clicking is such a hard task. And again, I said in this very quote, I was ready to debate you, but you just decided to get all angry and self-righteous.

 

Fine.

 

Buddy, nothing in anything I've said has even suggested that people must conform. You're making things up again. You're making up an argument that isn't there. You want to talk about debate rules? That's cool. This is a strawman fallacy.

 

    I don't have to consider how "squashed" you might feel in a discussion in which I disagree with your point of view. Disagreeing with you is not a personal attack, no matter how much you may wish it was (because that would lend you validity that you just kind of don't have here.) If you don't like my points? Throw up some counter-points! That's how discussions work.

 

    If you don't have any (which it appears as if you don't, and are unfamiliar with the rules that you're claiming to follow), then don't bother.

 

But again, you just come into a thread whose only purpose is to promote people posting favorites and turn it into a debate on a particular hero people choose? The whole point is that if you want to debate ONE character, please respect those that may be talking about Iron Man and don't point out faults. It's easy to criticize something you do not agree with, so far in the other thread, it is you who have gone off the rails and now, you just want to further it by turning it into a Superman debate thread? That makes no sense to me. Heck, not sure why Uther likes it either.

 

I don't impose on others. Yeah, these are just "words" that one can gloss over, but not everyone who posts there may care to read about a Superman debate. This is like if you and I stand up in a cafeteria and start loudly debating across the room about politics. Sure, you and I are free to say what we want, but what about the audience? Some may care, others will not. So, you tell them to leave the cafeteria, after they paid for the food? "Lump it or leave it"? No consideration for others?

 

Again, it's just one mouse click away; this is not asking you to climb Mt. Everest.

 

 

    Here's how I know you didn't read it: It actually contains a tie-in to a seconding of a favorite comic book hero of mine. That's what we call a cohesive argument. We address the issue being discussed currently (in this case, directly speaking Uther on the matter of Superman), and we latch that right onto the main point of the post.

 

First, I know you do not understand, "Jack" and continue to belittle me. Sad, but fair enough.

 

Here is what you do not seem to realize.

 

On that other thread, you quoted Uther's one sentence. Later on, in that other thread you complained about "you having a discussion with a guildie" and that a third party comes in and messes that up.

What you seem to fail to realize is that quote and your response was directed at me, word for word.

 

Uther already gave his reasons above. He replied that he agreed to my post in that one sentence. You DID NOT reply to his post, you replied to mine (you simply snipped the rest and quoted his one sentence reply). So your inability to see that makes me wonder why you continue to feign innocence. I am big enough to realize, in your zeal, you probably were mistaken, but you do not seem to be capable of that in this instance. And look, I didn't mind to reply later on: I was thinking of making a separate thread for it, but you've raised such a big stink over this, I don't feel like it is worth the hassle.

 

   You ignored that, opting instead to feign some kind of exasperation with the very idea that someone doesn't agree with you about a fictional alien from a comic book. Frankly, I don't know why you, or anyone would waste their time and energy on thumbing their nose at a civil discussion with a point/counter-point style of presentation, but you are, evidently, far too experienced and practiced at this here internet for any of us to comprehend what you're getting at (Spoiler: It's nothing. You've got nothing.)

 

And again, you see your side, I see you jumping in with:

 

FINALLY! I have someone to argue about Superman with!

 

And then lots of points that contradict each other.

 

Someone to "Argue" with. Not "Debate" with. Not a "Oh, as much as I see your opinion, I disagree because..."

 

It is you who have nothing to stand on and now you talk so "high" when your entrance was less than desirable. I saw no civil discussion at that point and frankly. while you may have "cleaned up" with your continuation with Uther, you are still missing the point. And that point is not Superman debate, it is your responses immediately afterward, which seem to be screaming and cussing.

 

So now you are just gonna spam your discussion and to hell with your fellow posters? That's fine. Not my style to impose my will on others, but it seems to be yours, even if you say you hate that trait in Superman.

 

 

    I can only wonder how it is someone arrives at the idea that discussion of any sort, on a forum, that isn't explicitly about the topic proposed in the title (no matter how closely related it may be) is not to be tolerated in a thread.

 

    Why can't people ask "why"? Why don't you want them to ask "why"? Why does it appear as if you can't handle the very notion that someone would ask "why"?

 

    Why does it appear as if you can't handle someone disagreeing with you?

 

    Hell, while we're at it, why don't you adhere to the rules of debate and discussion?

 

I already discussed this in my above reply and even in this message. It is not the "Why can't I?" but, "Why can't you create another thread?" As Bea below said, she did not start that thread to be a discussion and it is simply better to create another thread. Should I be talking about nu-52 dealings or how I don't agree with Quesada's decisions in that thread? Again, I know human nature: such things happen and I have no qualms against it, but even between you and Uther in the other thread, it's become something off-topic and really, for you guys, people may gloss over it anyway because they don't care for Superman (as Bea states). I just don't wish to impose that on others. I choose to be unselfish and think of others. Maybe that is beyond you and you have not realized that. Prove me wrong? So far, you haven't.

 

    Also, you haven't actually pointed out any hypocrisy (I dare you to do it), which makes this accusation baseless. These aren't assumptions, as I'm drawing from the events as they happened, so that accusation is baseless. An epitaph is a poem written in memory of the deceased, or an etching on a tombstone, so that's just straight-up wrong, and it'd only take you like a second to google the words you're attempting to use in order to appear as if you've got a grasp on what it is you're saying (you don't).

 

I haven't pointed out any counter-points because you started this "baseless accusation" in both threads. All I did was sigh and say you will possibly disagree, but I can see this going on for pages. It is you who chose not to understand and whine about a new thread starting up when...hey...just a mouse-click away. It is you who chooses to continue this. I did not call you anything in that post: You just assumed and carried on with me as the villain, even though I acknowledge people would want to debate this but it should be moved because that wou7ld bury the original topic.

 

I mean, why bother if you keep attacking? Only now do I see an attempt to be "calm and reasonable" and not "Let's argue!". You are back-pedaling as you cover yourself.

 

And heck, all the facts are in your posts. Again, you chose to escalate that. When I typed that :sigh: post, I was just tired and resigned but didn't want to cloud up the thread.

 

I haven't seen much generosity and clamness here: I do know you posted about Iron Man and Spider-man...that's about it.

 

And afterward, you "jumped" on me and my Superman post and answered my post, in my head, all zealous: I didn't even link that you did the Iron Man/Spider-man post.

 

Go ahead back through the thread; I'll wait. Again, that was not Uther's post, it was mine. And while I was open to debate on it, you've shown in the after posts complaining that you aren't as calm as you think you are.

[Grott]

 

I will also state something here:

 

You and I and even the person who started this whole thing are quite passionate people in our likes for certain characters. Even if this turned out to be a reasonable debate (and it hasn't had that effect already IMO), I could see the previous thread devolving into a "Superman debate thread" very easily as we pick apart things point by point.

 

While I am generally alright with off-topicness and I do it myself, as I said, the previous thread is about "celebrating your favorites" and not criticizing others because of their choice of favorites. And really, this may not stop at one character, but turn into a debate about others as well. IMO, the very first post wasn't as much as an open debate, but struck me as an "O-boy-O-boy! I can't wait to win converts to my side even though I should respect people have different perspectives!" Perhaps that is a false view on my end, but that poster seems to be spoiling for fight or debate that can easily go on for pages upon pages as neither side is going to be convinced. I am sure he will not be convinced, given his wording and I will not be convinced.

 

So between all the postings of favorites, we are going to have this on-going debate which, I feel, would drive away a few posters who would want to post up a hero and why they like it (without someone tearing down their position as to WHY they like their particular hero).

 

Not everyone likes Strawberries, folks. Some prefer Raspberries and that's how it is. Peoples tastes and perspectives will be different. I hope I am not the only one that appreciates that fact and sees someone who may not but wishes to push a debate without seeing the possibility of a thread devolving into pure debate as these types of posts take it over.

 

I've never been good at the whole breaking quotes up thing that Shuck does, so I'm going to do this in a very sloppy and frankly, shitty manner. But you'll get the point.

 

 

"You and I and even the person who started this whole thing are quite passionate people in our likes for certain characters. Even if this turned out to be a reasonable debate (and it hasn't had that effect already IMO), I could see the previous thread devolving into a "Superman debate thread" very easily as we pick apart things point by point."

 

First off, I'd like to say that it was a reasonable debate. I took no offense to anything said, and like Shuck pointed out earlier, we continued the conversation in skype for hours afterward. Also, if it became a "Superman debate thread" and we started picking apart things point by point, I'd be ecstatic! I love super hero debates! I never expect anyone to agree with me on these types of conversations, and I love hearing the points of view that other, equally read comic book fans have. The beauty of the comic book art form is that it's so vastly open to interpretation, which is obviously outstanding fuel for discussion.

 

 

"While I am generally alright with off-topicness and I do it myself, as I said, the previous thread is about "celebrating your favorites" and not criticizing others because of their choice of favorites. And really, this may not stop at one character, but turn into a debate about others as well. IMO, the very first post wasn't as much as an open debate, but struck me as an "O-boy-O-boy! I can't wait to win converts to my side even though I should respect people have different perspectives!" Perhaps that is a false view on my end, but that poster seems to be spoiling for fight or debate that can easily go on for pages upon pages as neither side is going to be convinced. I am sure he will not be convinced, given his wording and I will not be convinced."

 

"This may not stop at one character, but turn into a debate about others as well"? That's the most exciting news I've heard all day! How is an endless debate about the likes and dislikes of comic book heroes possibly seen as a bad thing for any comic book fan? I went through a debate similar to this for four hours on Skype yesterday (as mentioned earlier) and I loved it. I was almost late for work because of it. Why is it such a terrible thing to want to add like-minded fans into our conversation? I really did not get the feeling of "O-boy-O-boy! I can't wait to win converts to my side even though I should respect people have different perspectives!" I got the feeling of "O-boy-O-boy! I can't wait to discuss my opinions with people who are actually educated on this subject!"

 

 

"So between all the postings of favorites, we are going to have this on-going debate which, I feel, would drive away a few posters who would want to post up a hero and why they like it (without someone tearing down their position as to WHY they like their particular hero)."

 

Hold on... "and why they like it (without someone tearing down their position as to WHY they like their particular hero)." ....What?

 

You think everyone should be free to put up why they like their hero but no one should be allowed to ask why they like their hero? What's the point then? And how does this make any kind of sense?

 

 

"Not everyone likes Strawberries, folks. Some prefer Raspberries and that's how it is. Peoples tastes and perspectives will be different. I hope I am not the only one that appreciates that fact and sees someone who may not but wishes to push a debate without seeing the possibility of a thread devolving into pure debate as these types of posts take it over."

 

Okay. Clearly Shuck and I both appreciate the fact that people's tastes will be different. Probably even more so than the rest of the thread, because we asked each other "Why do you see it that way?" We're interested to know what the thought process behind each other's decisions was. If I like strawberries, and you like raspberries, and you ask me why I like strawberries, rest assured I won't take it as a personal attack or someone itching for a fight. I'll say "I like strawberries because of their texture and taste. Why do you like raspberries?" because maybe, through that discussion, I'll decide to try raspberries or you will decide to try strawberries. At very least you'll understand why I like strawberries and I'll understand why you like raspberries. How is this a bad thing?

 

 

 

 

EDIT: I'd like to add, I'm not trying to fight anyone. Every time someone sees a broken up post that addresses things point-for-point they freak out and get defensive. You stated your opinion, here's my counter. And that's all it is. I'm sure you're a perfectly nice gentleman. I just disagree with you.

---

As the creator of the thread, it wasn't intended to be a "feel all happy" thread, where no actual discussion takes place (seeing that disagreements are a natural part of discussion.). But then again, with any thread that's made, I actually want people to engage each other, ask questions, disagree and say why, not just stand around telling everyone how awesome their ideas and opinions are. That's boring and no one grows from that shit.

 

Plus, people derailing from threads happen all the time without the mods having the step in. The only time it becomes a problems is when people start shouting about how their feelings are hurt, especially when no one involved is being even kind of hostile. It's getting tiring and honestly, I'm starting to lose a lot of respect for this place.

 

Can't even have a light hearted disagreement about fuckin' Superman... Seriously.

 

I was looking for an excerpt of this post to quote so I could state how much I agree with it. 

 

But I agree with every single word here. 

 

I wrote a huge rant today about how illogical and stupid it is that there's no disagreement allowed on this forum. How does anyone in this community actually expect to learn and grow if no one is allowed to disagree? Why the hell do you think there are debate classes in high schools or even open student discussions in history classes? It's one of the greatest methods of learning. If you're so hopelessly unsure of your favorite super hero that your only option is to freak out about personal attacks when someone asks "why do you like this character?" you probably didn't have an attachment to that character anyway. 

 

If anyone's wondering where that rant is, I deleted it because I knew if I kept it up someone would cry harassment and the thread would be deleted and no one would read it anyway. 

 

I should be used to it by now, but I still can't believe it when a thread gets closed or moved because someone decides to say the two forbidden words: "I disagree."

[Black]

See, this is why Uther is cool in my book and I understand Uther, even though I've grown a bit more philosophical about Comics and media and just accepting.

 

First off, I'd like to say that it was a reasonable debate. I took no offense to anything said, and like Shuck pointed out earlier, we continued the conversation in skype for hours afterward. Also, if it became a "Superman debate thread" and we started picking apart things point by point, I'd be ecstatic! I love super hero debates! I never expect anyone to agree with me on these types of conversations, and I love hearing the points of view that other, equally read comic book fans have. The beauty of the comic book art form is that it's so vastly open to interpretation, which is obviously outstanding fuel for discussion.

 

....

 

"This may not stop at one character, but turn into a debate about others as well"? That's the most exciting news I've heard all day! How is an endless debate about the likes and dislikes of comic book heroes possibly seen as a bad thing for any comic book fan? I went through a debate similar to this for four hours on Skype yesterday (as mentioned earlier) and I loved it. I was almost late for work because of it. Why is it such a terrible thing to want to add like-minded fans into our conversation? I really did not get the feeling of "O-boy-O-boy! I can't wait to win converts to my side even though I should respect people have different perspectives!" I got the feeling of "O-boy-O-boy! I can't wait to discuss my opinions with people who are actually educated on this subject!"

 

Well, again, I understand about human nature and all that, but what is the harm starting a "Superman" thread or a general basic thread of comic debate. Come on! We can get multiple topics on this forum about that stuff and hey, maybe they'll even make a sub-section just for comics? Wouldn't that be great?

 

Hold on... "and why they like it (without someone tearing down their position as to WHY they like their particular hero)." ....What?

 

You think everyone should be free to put up why they like their hero but no one should be allowed to ask why they like their hero? What's the point then? And how does this make any kind of sense?

 

Well, look at my post for an example. Bea asked about Superman and several people chimed in. I also responded. She asked, I gave her my perspective.

 

Now, I didn't convince her, but she seems to grasp there is "something" there, it ain't just for her. That's cool, we move on.

 

Personally, I am more about short things. Heck, maybe I want to ask about why people like Squirrel Girl and have to wade through pages of a Superman debate to find out the replies. I am not against debate, I do it too, I just sorta like to attempt to try and keep things in place. I guess an example would be my take on RP OOC/IC talk: I prefer to hear IC, but if it is late and people start talking about the new episode for Defiance or whatnot, I let them! People do that.

 

Maybe I let Superman lead me too much. If there is a "debate", let's go to the debate room and others can follow. I mean, I know you and I and even Shcuk can go for pages about it, but it's gonna overcrowd, IMO, the original thread. Again, simple mosue-click to check in, read and if they like it, they can give their two cents and a cup of coffee. Heck, didn't Superman not fight in Metropolis but chose the Moon when he fought Manchester Black and crew in "the Elite"? To me, that's classy. You don't impose things on others.

 

That also may color my personal life: I've had to deal with impositions by others and I generally let it happen, but sometimes, I just don't want to. Maybe I want to keep reading about people's favorites in that thread and not stray too far. Again, difference of opinion, but we are talking just one thread here that could evolve into more threads here...but now you want to just keep it in one thread???

 

Again, I should state that I felt it is Shuck that over-reacted...maybe you too, but it's just simply starting a new thread to continue the discussion and others can follow if they are interested. Maybe a bit too neat, but again, I am more accepting of other people's decisions. I like to hear them. I may even debate, but IMO, I see so many critics on the internet and not enough "enablers". I know this is not what you are doing, but you will have people who just don't want to debate for whatever reason. Maybe sooner or later, they will learn, but they will have to come to that realization on their own.

 

There are people I know that will not watch a black-and white program (another example) I am curious about that and find out, but I'll say my piece and move on. Others may tend to hound on the person. I go by a "light touch" in such matters, or attempt to.

 

Some folks just can be more gracious in their opening statements is all, I try to be. I fail at times, but I try.

 

And again, I don't disagree with any debate/conversation, I just want to feel free to debate without worrying I might be bothering some readers and they may be bothered not because of any one thing, but several things....long posts, not enough posters on-topic..anything actually.

 

This is not about silencing anyone, it is just moving something to its own topic. And like I said, that could create more topics to read.

 

 

:ahriman::ahriman:

[Shuck]

 

Excuse me. That was nowhere near my original post. Again, you are not reading, so why debate you? My original post was, "Okay, you want to have a debate? Please let's just move this topic to a new one." Maybe this concept is hard to grasp, because mouse-clicking is such a hard task. And again, I said in this very quote, I was ready to debate you, but you just decided to get all angry and self-righteous.

 

Fine.

 

Sure it is. Let's walk through history. Again. Because the things you say are preserved in a text-based format.

 

 

:sigh:

 

While some messages have gone a bit off-topic, this is a thread about "elevating" favorites, not pointing out flaws or denigrating one's you may not like.

 

Sometimes it is a personal choice what one likes or does not like. I may pick apart your post, but this needs to be in another thread on its own (IMO). It should not be here, where people named their favorites and someone asked *why* do some people favor Superman.

 

:ahriman::ahriman:

 

So. Here we have the meat of your thrust. Right in bold. Your words. You'll notice that A) Nope, that's not what the thread had ever stated, and B) No one's denigrated anything, as denigration is defined as "unfair criticism" first and foremost, or "disparaging", which would be to regard something as being of little worth. Neither of those things happened.

 

I don't know why you insist on pretending you have a better grasp of language than you do.

 

Also, you're not so much "debating" anything as you are making shit up, and throwing out words that you don't understand the meaning of.

 

But again, you just come into a thread whose only purpose is to promote people posting favorites and turn it into a debate on a particular hero people choose? The whole point is that if you want to debate ONE character, please respect those that may be talking about Iron Man and don't point out faults. It's easy to criticize something you do not agree with, so far in the other thread, it is you who have gone off the rails and now, you just want to further it by turning it into a Superman debate thread? That makes no sense to me. Heck, not sure why Uther likes it either.

 

In whatever fantasy land you imagine yourself to be the calm, reasonable individual in this exchange, I'm sure that opening line is true. I mean, it's not in reality. Also, I'll point out faults in whatever I like. In any discussion. At any time. If you can't handle that, nobody here can help you, but that's been said.

 

I'll go ahead and link you to my posts in that thread (you won't read those either, because that's the fashionable thing to do, I guess):

 

Here's the one that you took issue with. In this one, we see, and I can't believe I'm explaining this again, that my (entirely fair, and grounded in what happened in the comics)criticism of Superman ties into some thoughts on another character all together. We can already see that the sole focus is not on Superman, but on the discussion of comic book heroes and literature in general.

 

But that's a bit you would like to gloss over, because I guess you live in a world where pesky things like "facts" and "reality" get in the way of your grandstanding nonsense, and your ability to pretend to be smug.

 

Moving on, we have my initial post in that thread. Which, as you can see, offers more discussion points on other characters. Nowhere does anyone suggest that the other thread be based entirely around the discussion of one character, so...y'know, again you're making shit up.

 

Even the posts after that move the discussion in new directions.

 

Is english just not your first language? If so, that's ok, and I can cut you some slack on it, but holy hell, guy. You can't just not look at the words.

 

 

 

I don't impose on others. Yeah, these are just "words" that one can gloss over, but not everyone who posts there may care to read about a Superman debate. This is like if you and I stand up in a cafeteria and start loudly debating across the room about politics. Sure, you and I are free to say what we want, but what about the audience? Some may care, others will not. So, you tell them to leave the cafeteria, after they paid for the food? "Lump it or leave it"? No consideration for others?

 

The difference here being that this isn't a cafeteria, we aren't shouting across a room, and the discussion that was being had was not even a full degree separated from the short exchange we had on Superman. This analogy is flawed from the ground up, and the argument is still invalid.

 

Also, nobody cares about how little you say you impose on others. You've imposed on the previous thread. I mean, far be it for me to call you a liar, but that is some wild un-truth.

 

Again, it's just one mouse click away; this is not asking you to climb Mt. Everest.

 

And this is just wonderful. I'll tell you why in a minute, but I want this one hanging out there.

 

 

 

First, I know you do not understand, "Jack" and continue to belittle me. Sad, but fair enough.

 

Not what was said, let's revisit.

 

I would like to walk you down what was said, now. Because there's a disconnect here. Let me bridge that for you, as you don't understand jack, and are guilty of the exact thing that you're (baselessly) accusing me of. Which is it's own special kind of hilarious.

 

That's what was said. In response to this:

 

And I've been in more flame wars since flame wars was a term. I am not moved by your stance or your debate style to throw my and others views into question. From what I probably understand about you, you really have not read and considered the points in our posts but have decided to pursue your own agenda. If you are a true debater, you do not attack the speaker, you attack the issues.

 

That's what you said. I'm not belittling you, I'm correcting you. There's a difference. You (for some reason) thought that you could...I don't know, "profile" a stranger on the internet based on like two half-read blurbs. You also decided that everyone needed to know that you've...been...on the internet. I guess. Nobody cares, and it's not relevant to any bit of any conversation that you and I have ever had, but hey! Why not, right!?

 

Seriously, though: You attempted to impress, it didn't happen, that's not being belittled, and you're not nearly keen enough to "understand" a person through the internet. Nobody here is. Nobody. Unless you're secretly telepathic. Are you? What number am I thinking of?

 

 

 

Here is what you do not seem to realize.

 

On that other thread, you quoted Uther's one sentence. Later on, in that other thread you complained about "you having a discussion with a guildie" and that a third party comes in and messes that up.

What you seem to fail to realize is that quote and your response was directed at me, word for word.

 

Nope. It wasn't. Nowhere in anything that was posted on the topic of Superman was directed at you.

 

Here's the post. Again. Point out to me where I say anything in this post to you. I mean, you can't, because it doesn't exist, but I want to see how far you're willing to pretend.

 

Uther already gave his reasons above. He replied that he agreed to my post in that one sentence. You DID NOT reply to his post, you replied to mine (you simply snipped the rest and quoted his one sentence reply). So your inability to see that makes me wonder why you continue to feign innocence. I am big enough to realize, in your zeal, you probably were mistaken, but you do not seem to be capable of that in this instance. And look, I didn't mind to reply later on: I was thinking of making a separate thread for it, but you've raised such a big stink over this, I don't feel like it is worth the hassle.

 

You're gonna give your ego a rash if you keep stroking it like that.

 

Anyway, I was responding to Uther. The guy I quoted. He agreed with your points, so I provided some counter-points. To him. If I wanted to respond to you, I would have. Like I'm doing now.

 

This isn't an inability to see what happened, this is a refusal to follow you down the twisting, ill-maintained road to crazytown. I have no idea why you thought that I was responding to you by-proxy. Who would do that? Nobody would do that. Nobody would believe anybody would do that, unless they had some kind of self-importance issues, and that's not something I care to broach.

 

Also, there's no zeal here. I don't think you know what "zeal" means. Let's clear the air on that one too, and add it to your list of "things I don't understand, but will use anyway": Eagerness or ardent interest in pursuing something.

 

In this pursuit, right here? There is no fire. There's no eagerness. Trust me. I would know. I'm me.

 

 

And again, you see your side, I see you jumping in with:

 

FINALLY! I have someone to argue about Superman with!

 

And then lots of points that contradict each other.

 

Someone to "Argue" with. Not "Debate" with. Not a "Oh, as much as I see your opinion, I disagree because..."

 

What points that contradict? Point those out, otherwise, you're making things up. Again.

 

Anyway, this is another point where you've bungled your communications. The word "argue" is used to denote a contention or disagreement with words. Any negative connotations you might attach are...well, they're fiction. Like the majority of your points. Utter, total, fiction.

 

So...yeah, that is in fact what I said. And I meant it! I like arguing. It's a great way to exchange ideas.

 

It is you who have nothing to stand on and now you talk so "high" when your entrance was less than desirable. I saw no civil discussion at that point and frankly. while you may have "cleaned up" with your continuation with Uther, you are still missing the point. And that point is not Superman debate, it is your responses immediately afterward, which seem to be screaming and cussing.

 

So now you are just gonna spam your discussion and to hell with your fellow posters? That's fine. Not my style to impose my will on others, but it seems to be yours, even if you say you hate that trait in Superman.

 

Cleaned up? What the fuck are you talking about? The language, cadence, and general posting style hasn't changed in the slightest. The conversation moved on. Hell, the time stamps on the posts themselves will even reveal that nothing was edited. Seriously, what the fuck are you talking about?

 

Moving on, you can't claim victory if you haven't provided a single counter-point. And you haven't. Like, at all. It's all been either utter bullshit, or a willful ignorance of events as they happen.

 

I already discussed this in my above reply and even in this message. It is not the "Why can't I?" but, "Why can't you create another thread?" As Bea below said, she did not start that thread to be a discussion and it is simply better to create another thread.

 

Ok, remember when I said that I wanted that one little bit hanging out there, because it was funny? This is why. This isn't even close to what she said, and you're full of shit.

 

Check this out:

 

As the creator of the thread, it wasn't intended to be a "feel all happy" thread, where no actual discussion takes place (seeing that disagreements are a natural part of discussion.). But then again, with any thread that's made, I actually want people to engage each other, ask questions, disagree and say why, not just stand around telling everyone how awesome their ideas and opinions are. That's boring and no one grows from that shit.

 

Plus, people derailing from threads happen all the time without the mods having the step in. The only time it becomes a problems is when people start shouting about how their feelings are hurt, especially when no one involved is being even kind of hostile. It's getting tiring and honestly, I'm starting to lose a lot of respect for this place.

 

Can't even have a light hearted disagreement about fuckin' Superman... Seriously.

 

I even bolded that for you. You're so incredibly wrong, and off-base that it's...well, it's not even funny anymore. It's just strange. Right there, she says the opposite of what you think she said. Right there! Her words!

 

 

 

 

Should I be talking about nu-52 dealings or how I don't agree with Quesada's decisions in that thread? Again, I know human nature: such things happen and I have no qualms against it, but even between you and Uther in the other thread, it's become something off-topic and really, for you guys, people may gloss over it anyway because they don't care for Superman (as Bea states). I just don't wish to impose that on others. I choose to be unselfish and think of others. Maybe that is beyond you and you have not realized that. Prove me wrong? So far, you haven't.

 

Why not? Talk about whatever. You're not making any grand statements by doing...whatever this is. If you're so very unselfish, I would argue that you would've just let those events play out any way they like, as doing anything else would invest a piece of your self into the happenings, and would therefore make any actions you take selfish, but that's because I understand the logical progressions of events.

 

And, actually, I've proven you wrong like twenty times over, you just live in a fantasy world. As evidenced in the last quote. The one where you imagined that someone said something entirely opposite to what they actually said.

 

I haven't pointed out any counter-points because you started this "baseless accusation" in both threads. All I did was sigh and say you will possibly disagree, but I can see this going on for pages. It is you who chose not to understand and whine about a new thread starting up when...hey...just a mouse-click away. It is you who chooses to continue this. I did not call you anything in that post: You just assumed and carried on with me as the villain, even though I acknowledge people would want to debate this but it should be moved because that wou7ld bury the original topic.

 

You haven't thrown up any counter points or supporting examples because you don't have any, and are entirely too proud to just bow out.

 

I continue this pursuit because...well, honestly? It's a blast for me. I love exchanges in communication. Love 'em. I love conflict! You're just, unfortunately, bad at it. That's cool. Everyone's got their thing. Don't pretend you have some kind of secret evidence, though. Put your cards on the table, man.

 

Also, there was no whining. I understand your points entirely, they're just made-up.

 

I mean, why bother if you keep attacking? Only now do I see an attempt to be "calm and reasonable" and not "Let's argue!". You are back-pedaling as you cover yourself.

 

Never uttered those words. Like, in my life. There's no back-pedaling here. And, like before, I dare you to point it out. I do.

 

And heck, all the facts are in your posts. Again, you chose to escalate that. When I typed that :sigh: post, I was just tired and resigned but didn't want to cloud up the thread.

 

If you didn't want to cloud up the thread, why did you bother posting? That's just counter-productive.

 

I haven't seen much generosity and clamness here: I do know you posted about Iron Man and Spider-man...that's about it.

 

Except for the post in question, where I spoke on Rorschach, Batman, and Superman. Also, the post about John Stewart. And the post about Namor. Really, the vast majority of my posts in that thread.

 

If you're gonna make shit up, at least make sure that the medium you're using isn't one that records conversations with a handy timestamp, because you end up looking like a fool when you try to go against those.

 

And afterward, you "jumped" on me and my Superman post and answered my post, in my head, all zealous: I didn't even link that you did the Iron Man/Spider-man post.

 

Go ahead back through the thread; I'll wait. Again, that was not Uther's post, it was mine. And while I was open to debate on it, you've shown in the after posts complaining that you aren't as calm as you think you are.

 

Ok, again, you're not telepathic, and I won't believe you're able to accurately pin down my emotional state unless you can correctly guess what number I'm thinking of, and prove your superhuman ability to know a person who you've only had sparing interactions with via the internet.

 

Also, this uh...this says a lot. "In your head". Your head that imagines statements. Your head that makes up support where there isn't any. Your head that assumes you're being targeted in a post clearly directed at someone else (regardless of whether or not they agreed with you to begin with), and bore no actual indication that you, the user with the handle Black, should weep because Superman blows goats (he does).

 

Your head's straight-up wrong, man.

[Black]

You know, the fact that you do not recognize the fact you did wrong is just either silly or a falsehood. Simple as that.

 

You know what, you aren't worth it. I could refute each point, but again, this is turning into a circus for your trolling benefit. The fact you do not see my side and only yours and the fact you stick with just confirms it.

 

At the least, I will disagree with you and your rash over-reaction in which you not only assume falsely, you go and slander when my request to change threads was no more than keeping things straight.

 

Time to end this. And really, you are not the calm person you paint yourself to bem, judging from the length of your post and your initial and second attack on me.