Subject: Sorry, it's its own continuum, therefore not our job.
Author:
Posted on: 2010-11-07 14:27:00 UTC
Naylor and Sherer (the artist of Badly Drawn Kitties) used to share characters and work on individual comics set within the same universe. They had a huge falling-out and "split up", but continued to use the co-made characters. Thus, it's not fanfic, it's co-writing, therefore it's not under our jurisdiction.
So I find this webcomic called better days. It contradicts itself on many levels, has an obvious author insert/gary stu/god mode stu main character, and preaches its authors contradictory political views with increasing intensity as the comic progresses. At first I think that nothing can be done about it because I thought it was original fiction, but as it turns out one of the main characters and one of the main plot points are each stolen from one of his friends' comics. To me this looks like a bad case of improbable AU, and is therefore vulnerable of being sporked. It is also a furry comic, but I don't think that has anything to do with how bad it is. If you feel the need to read it, just search Better Days by Jay Naylor. Jay Naylor sells furry porn for a living, so his site and the comic are NSFW, and ,for the comic portion, extremely NSFB.
Naylor and Sherer (the artist of Badly Drawn Kitties) used to share characters and work on individual comics set within the same universe. They had a huge falling-out and "split up", but continued to use the co-made characters. Thus, it's not fanfic, it's co-writing, therefore it's not under our jurisdiction.
Correct usage of its/it's, and adjacently at that!
The article I linked you to contains bad language.
There's this MSTing site called Project A.F.T.E.R. Besides sporking truly horrendous anime-based fics, they also have a section that tackles bad webcomics. Normally, said comics are just plain weird, silly, cliché-ridden and so forth, but ultimately harmless. However, there is one, notable, exception. I'm talking about 'Grim Tales From Down Below', a webcomic based on the Cartoon Network show 'The Grim Adventures of Billy & Mandy', with appearances from Spawn, Jack Skellington, and others. Now, in this comic, the author, Bleedman (pseudonym of Vinson Ngo)...
*seethes*
*explodes with rage* MAKES FUN OF NINE ELEVEN!!! WHAT THE HELL KIND OF SICK BASTARD MAKES FUN OF NINE ELEVEN AND THE IRAQ WAR, HUH?!? THERE IS NO "BILLY AND MANDY IN ALL OF US", YOU HEAR ME, NGO? IF I EVER GET MY HANDS ON YOU, I'LL DRIVE A CROWBAR INTO YOUR HEAD, YOU CRAZY, TWISTED, LOLI FREAK!!!
*takes a deep breath*
I'm sorry, I had to let that out. Oh, and don't think I'm exaggerating. Ordinarily, I don't like bashing authors, but this guy knows perfectly well what he's doing. For proof, please click the link below. It'll lead you to the Project A.F.T.E.R. article.
Part VII: "Grim Tales From Down Below"
What do you think? Am I right?
Even I don't rage that much. Tone it down, for the love of everything...
And no, I would not have released that rant if he had not said so. Also, if it's the language that bothers you, I figured if it could be said on 'The Simpsons', it could be said here.
And uh, July? Please don't think I'm trying to aggravate you with my posts. I really do want to get along with people here, and that includes you. Why not be friends?
But can you honestly say that wasn't just wrong? Besides, the guy said it himself, he absolutely doesn't care what people think of him or say about him.
I've been trying to stay out of these, because I don't like drama. But that was uncalled for.
You said, and I quote:
IF I EVER GET MY HANDS ON YOU, I'LL DRIVE A CROWBAR INTO YOUR HEAD, YOU CRAZY, TWISTED, LOLI FREAK!!!
Uncalled for. I do not care what they posted-- there was not even this much rage when the PPC found out about badfics using the Bible as a canon, a while back. And we had fundamentalist Christians on the 'Board. And they were calmer about their feelings than you were, there.
And I've just seen your second response! And have asked July not to respond, because every time this starts, it gets a little worse, and I'm trying to prevent another all-out war, so Neshomeh doesn't have to get involved.
Read the Constitution, please. No flaming, make posts legible. What July is objecting to is the ALLCAPS rant, basically telling the person you'd attack them with a crowbar if you could, and calling them a "crazy, twisted LOLI freak." Firstly, nobody here should be calling anyone a freak like that. We're a community of misfits who instruct newbies to leave their sanity at the door-- glass houses, anyone? Freak isn't a bad thing, and using "crazy, twisted freak" as an insult (over a comic!) is absolutely unnecessary. Even if they made fun of 9/11. People have done so, and will continue to do so. We deal with anger here by laughing at the stupid. We don't attack, we don't rage, we don't threaten.
We write silly stories to make the stupid feel less brain-numbing.
Also, to censor paraphrase: Intent is Not Magic. If you did not intend to make July angry, but you incidentally made quite a lot of people uncomfortable, your best bet is not to go "Uh, but didn't he deserve it?" Like I said, we write silly stories. We do other things, but we're not... a community of flamers and bashers and jerks. That is July's objection. I am responding because her net connection ended and she couldn't see your post I am sick of the wars between you and her, and even if I agree with her it's still quite tiresome.
Basically, if you want to get along with people here, stop going on the offensive. If you want to get along with July, just apologize when you're in the wrong, rather than trying to justify every time. I'm not saying you should just roll over every time she (or anyone) criticises you, but sometimes you will be in the wrong! It is an inevitable fact of life, and going "but what they did was worse!" is not going to win you any friends. It should also be noted, by the way, that I am pointing this message at July as well. People do not need to be told every single time they were wrong, and being wrong is okay. Apologizing for being wrong is also okay! And everyone should be able to do that.
That means when you cross a line with a post, you look back at it and think "What would someone think coming across this post from another perspective? Is the anger I am getting valid?" and if the answer is yes, you apologize. And if you think you are being jumped on for no reason, you calmly and rationally explain why you disagree.
And we have a mature, adult conversation! That is how a forum keeps from spiralling into flame-wars.
First up, I'd just like to say (and I mean this) that I was not aiming to start a war. I was not. I don't like them any more than anyone else here. That said, it's a good thing you stepped in. Things would have gotten ugly again.
Now then. I posted that rant yesterday evening (from my perspective) and have thus had ample time to think over what I did. I am deeply ashamed, and I apologize. Understand that I would never actually attack anyone. With anything. Contrary to appearances, I am not a violent person, not by a long shot. Now that the post is there, and can't be taken back. I wish now that I'd simply not responded yesterday. So, once again, I sincerely apologize for what I did, and thank you for stepping in.
I'm glad you did not post with the intention of starting a flame war. Understand, please, that I would never assume you -wanted- a flame war. Nobody wants things to get ugly, unless they're a troll or holding a serious grudge. But, as I said, intent is not the only thing that counts. If you're throwing rocks off the edge of a building for fun, and one hits someone, it doesn't matter so much that you didn't mean to. See what I mean?
So thank you. Thank you very much for apologizing, for recognizing that the post crossed the line-- I really appreciate that.
And I'm very glad to have been forgiven.
Also, something I just want to say. The calm, rational explanation as to why I objected to the comic in the first place (i.e. the way I should have said it), is this. In my mind, the 9/11 incident and the subsequent Iraq war are horrible, horrible things that have claimed countless lives and caused tremendous amounts of pain, grief and loss. Now, I know that sometimes putting bad events in a less serious or even humorous light, after some time has passed, can help people cope with them, and make them hurt a little less. To such things, I do not object, since they can serve a good purpose.
However, the way 9/11 is portrayed in the comic I mentioned, seems to me to be working towards the exact opposite goal. In certain panels of this comic (reproduced in the article I linked to) we see how Grim discovers two plans drawn out by Mandy. One shows a map of Iraq covered in skull symbols, with the words 'Operation Freedom' printed over it. The other is a crude picture of the Twin Towers, with markings at the spots where the two airplanes will hit. The story behind this, apparently, is that Mandy herself planned the Twin Towers attack in order to kick off the 'War on Terror', which she also had planned.
This, I'm practically certain, is something that can really, really hurt those who have lost loved ones in one (or, who knows, both) of those events. I found the whole thing to be in such bad taste that I ended up exploding.
So, there you have it. That's the reason I hate this comic so much.
That still doesn't make exploding okay, which you seem to understand-- which is good.
But now we're on a cycle of, "I'm sorry, but this is why I did it." "Okay, you're forgiven (on this end, at least), but it was still wrong." "Okay, I'm glad you forgive me but this is why I did it." "...Yeah, still wrong."
I don't think it was even that offensive, frankly. People have done, said, and drawn far, far worse. I'd be inclined to take it as at least partly a potshot aimed at conspiracy theorists and 9/11 Truthers. Again-- humor helps people cope. I nearly said in my earlier post that it wasn't fair for someone to attack the works of someone who may simply be trying to deal with the tragedy in their own way-- but didn't, because for all I know you're from NYC yourself. Seeing as you're "practically certain" that this might hurt someone who had lost loved oness in the tragedies, I'll deduce that you have not, in fact, and say it here.
I understand your point of view, but it was still wrong.
(My own qualms with the comic, having read the article and the author's explanation, is that "it's what any other Reaper would do." Uh, no. This guy needs to read some Discworld.)
Should comic-sporks be done in comic format? That might be kind of fun, although time-consuming.
...And I don't know whether it's possible to spork this, since I'd have to look at it and look at the original to form some sort of opinion. And even then, I wouldn't be the one to ask.
I think a written sporking of a comic would be fun, but making a comic to spork a comic would work too, no?