Skip to main content

Is Scott for real?

I can't tell if Scott is satirizing himself or is really pissed off. Is anyone else's sarcasm detector working? I think mine's broken.

RE: Is Scott for real?

Joey Manley's picture

Drama is like Neil Gaiman's Sandman -- if you dare invoke its name, it will appear!

Joey
www.moderntales.com

Fabricari's picture

Surely I'm not the only one who's caught the hilarity that this is drama about (Teh) Drama? We may have entered into an infinite loop. If we can harness this energy and shoot it at the sun, we can create a Dyson Sphere built on perpetual misinformation and ignorance!

Steve "Fabricari" Harrison

Gah! All of those posts have left me just as confused on whether or not Scott was serious as I was before.

Oh he's for real.

Like Jay Z--> From the streets.

Joe Zabel's picture

"I heard a little about what Jerry has to say in it and I'm really hoping that once the book is out, the people who are choosing to elect themselves as our ambassadors read it and pay attention."

I promise not to pay any attention unless he gives me licence to do more evil.

Uncle Ghastly's picture

Being connected to people inside all sorts of webcomic communities means quite a bit of webcomic information gets funnelled my way so believe me when I tell you this:

Scott Kurtz is 100% NOT for real.

He is, in fact, a corporate created simulation of a "webcomic artist". The strips are written by a team of hollywood script writers as part of a work project at their detox centre. The artwork is out-sourced to Korea where each strip is created by a team of burned out ex-animators at a cost of less than three cents US per panel. The physical presence of Scott Kurtz is the product of a brilliant piece of animatronics created by Lucas's team at Industrial Light and Magic. The complex animatronic Kurtz exosuit is actually controlled from inside by a dwarf* and a trained lab monkey**. Two way audio transmitters and a micro-video transmitter allow live interaction with the Kurtz exosuit . The voice for Scott Kurtz is provided by none other than Canadian actor and comedian Jonathan Crombie. Kurtz's responses are created by a sophisticated real time script programmed to achieve maximum "webcomicness" and is even able to interact online when the Kurtz exosuit is not on public display.

The PVP-Kurtz project is actually owned and operated by a subsidiary of the British Petrolium Global Corporation. Its long range profit projections are examined quarterly to determine wether the project should be terminated.

So there you have it. Scott Kurtz is not for real.

*Originally none other than Kenny Baker until scheduling problems at conventions where both Kurtz and Baker were guests forced them to go with someone else.
**Which is why at times the Kurtz exosuit has become aggrivated and begun flinging fecese at people.

Uncle Ghastly's picture

It should be noted too that the size of the Kurtz exosuit is the result of the layers of sound reducing insulation required to muffle the noise of the animatronics. If you listen to Kurtz' movements very carefully in a quiet room you'll just be able to make out the sounds of the hydrolics, servos, and actuators. It is very tight, hot, and sweaty inside the Kurtz exosuit making things very uncomfortable for the dwarf/monkey pilot team within. A complex heat exchange system actually excretes the operators sweat outside the exosuit. If you put the Kurtz exosuit in a hot environment that sheen of sweat that developes over the suit is 100% genuine human/monkey persperation. This adds a level of realism to the Kutz exosuit unattained by even the most sophisticated of Hollywood animatronic special effects. So advanced is the exosuit that should BP decide to terminate the PVP-Kurtz project plans are already drafted to donate it to the Smithsonian for public display.

This level of sophistication is what truly sets Scott Kurtz apart from other webcomic artists.

apfurtado's picture

I knew it. I KNEW IT! Finally...the secret is out. I admire your courage yet, I fear for your safety, Ghastly.

Too funny, man.

Surlyben's picture

Scott Kurtz has a strange attitude about criticism. He doesn't seem to believe that if you publish you open yourself up to criticism. I mean, "let the work speak for itself" is a nice idea and all, but I can't think of anything that has ever been published that didn't attract critical review of one kind or another. He obviously has a problem with what he sees as the amateurishness of the criticism, but that's never been something that an author has control of as far as I can tell. ("Non-professional" criticism didn't start with webcomics. Some think it may have started with sci-fi zines in the 20s and 30s, but I bet self published reviews go back farther than that...)

Or maybe the problem is with people talking about drama that comes from the blogs associated with web comics. He might have a point if the blogs in question were personal, but his blog is right there on the same page as his comic. (And even personal blogs attract criticism and people looking to talk about drama or whatever. )

-
Ben Bittner

Joey Manley's picture

"Let the work speak for itself" is something that older artists often say to younger artists. The idea is that running your mouth off about the work -- or about things tangential to the work -- may cause readers to mix up what you've said with what you've created -- if they don't like what you've said, they may stop liking the work (and, usually, artists are better at creating great work than they are at saying things about it).

Scott Kurtz, of all the artists I know, would profit most from following that advice.

Joey
www.webcomicsnation.com

apfurtado's picture

In case this turns into another webcomic drama...I'd like to have my previous post on this thread stricken from the record. I thought this thread had taken a comical turn, (Thank you for that, Mr. Ghastly.)
:lol:

So I don't come off hypocritical at any point; I do find the drama amusing, in a distraction between producing comics sort of way. I'd just prefer being a casual observer.

In case the above statement is capable of being churned and twisted, ( I hope not because I’m not clever enough to retort) I’d like to say that I respect Joey Manly a great deal, and because I don’t know Scott Kurtz personally, I’ll just say that I’m inspired by, and admire his success.

On that note, I have some ELF `n TROLL comics to create. (whew!) :wink:
Carry on gentlemen.

"He obviously has a problem with what he sees as the amateurishness of the criticism, but that's never been something that an author has control of as far as I can tell."

It's not that the criticism is amateurish -- which it largely is. It's that it is sometimes positioned alongside or even above the work itself. In other words, webcomic review and discourse seems to want to be this additional, as-important industry, and it's not a very good starting point for readers. Imagine if someone recommended Peanuts to you, except rather than giving you the strips to read, they handed you a 20,000-word essay on how Peanuts between 1970 and 1980 redefined juvenile metapsychology by enforcing the concept of the "invisible adult," or the adult represented as impassable membrane, that both alienates and defines the Peanuts cast. Would you be as interested?

Kristofer Straub www.starslip.com

Joey Manley's picture

That's a pretty interesting allegation ("webcomic review and discourse seems to want to be this additional, as-important industry"). I haven't experienced that. But then, I'm not a cartoonist whose ass can possibly get chapped by somebody writing about my webcomic ... or choosing not to write about it.

No form of art or entertainment in history has managed to escape the accretion of layers and layers of criticism, reviews, commentary, and, yes, gossip. Few artists in history have ever appreciated the role of critics in the cultural process. Most artists hate most critics. Big whoop. That's the way it goes. Ultimately, the same license that Gabe & Tycho have to comment on trends in the videogame field, and to build their business around this commentary (even though they, themselves, are not designers of videogames), is the license that commentators have to jabber about the webcomics field, and to try to build a little meta-industry out of that activity. If the commentary is poorly written, or if, as Kurtz and others claim, there's *no reason for this stuff to exist,* because nobody cares about it, then, obviously, nobody will read it, and it will fade away.

If the commentary is interesting, though, and an audience exists for writing on the subject matter -- well, it won't fade away.

Doesn't seem to be fading away. Quite the opposite.

Aside to Tony: you don't think my posts are amusing? I'm offended!

(grin)

Joey
www.webcomicsnation.com

[quote="Airsick_Moth"] It's that it is sometimes positioned alongside or even above the work itself. In other words, webcomic review and discourse seems to want to be this additional, as-important industry, and it's not a very good starting point for readers.[/quote]

Nonsense. Not a single person has claimed their disection of a webcomic is more important than a webcomic itself.

Fact #1: These comics are disected because they have been deemed valuable enough to be looked at. Even if the comic gets panned, the act of panning it shows that it had value to begin with. This isn't acting as a representative, nor is attempting to usurp the creator's legacy they're trying to build for themselves. In fact, it's supporting that legacy. This is lauding the work. This people telling the artists "Hey, good job at being valuable."

The rest of the accusations being lobbed by Scooter, and even yourself, is nothing more than insecure bullshit masqureading as anti-elitism.

Fact #2: Our current "pros" are the worst representatives of webcomics we can possibly put out there because they still act like fucking fanboys every chance they get. This bullshit is Rob Schnider taking out an ad in Variety telling movie critics that they don't have an opinion on Deuce Bigalowe unless they have a Pulitzer.

It's not 1999~2001 anymore. And while word of mouth was good enough to get them in the comfortable postions of power they're in now, there are just too many comics, and too many potential readers looking a small section of the internet now for it to work. It takes a hype machine now, and critics are part of that machine... As are collectives like Blank Label. As such, it is a good starting point because THAT's how people find out about new works. It creates awareness of a product that likely wasn't there to begin with.

If they're pros, maybe they should start fucking acting like it instead of kings trying to hold on to their kingdom. Scooter wants his comics to be important, but he's angry because people aren't looking at his work the way he wants them to...

Fact #3: Them complaining about "teh Drama" is idiotic since 90% of it comes from them anyway.

Surlyben's picture
Imagine if someone recommended Peanuts to you, except rather than giving you the strips to read, they handed you a 20,000-word essay on how Peanuts between 1970 and 1980 redefined juvenile metapsychology by enforcing the concept of the "invisible adult," or the adult represented as impassable membrane, that both alienates and defines the Peanuts cast. Would you be as interested?
 

I might be, if the essay was well written, yeah. But that's because Peanuts is a strip that only really works for me on a critical level. I appreciate it rather than enjoy it. Calvin and Hobbes, on the other hand...

As to the rest... Hmm. Publishing on the internet is a great leveler. It's a problem (if you want to call it that) with the medium that any amateur can post a review that looks (at least on the surface) just like what a more professional person could do. It's not a phenomenon unique to webcomics. Blogs vs traditional newpapers, would be a more prominent example. (I have mixed feelings about this subject. I like zines, and self publishing in general, and it's great to see everyone able to get in on it, but there is a certain two-staples-and-a-bad-photocopy charm that is missing in blogs and the like. )

"Let the work speak for itself" is something that older artists often say to younger artists.
 

Heh. That's true. In fact, I had an art prof who gave exactly that advice to his classes in general. He also told some of us to ignore that advice and go ahead and talk the work up. (Studying art in college was at least 50% learning how to BS about the work in critiques. Sadly, the skill really only applied to college art critiques. The same prof also told us that if we wanted to publish, there was no stopping criticism, so we had all better learn to cope and move on...)

As far as Scott Kurtz letting the work speak for itself... Hmm. I suspect that his blog helps him more than it hurts him. He has a talent for stirring things up and coming across as more of a curmudgeon than he probably is, but I'm sure there are lots of people who stick around because the blog makes them feel more able to relate to the work. The Penny Arcade blog works that way...

If the commentators are uninteresting, they will fade away. If, as Kurtz and others claim, there's *no reason for this stuff to exist,* then nobody will read it, and, again, it will fade away.

I wonder if this is true on the internet. Sure the commentators might fade away, but uninteresting commentary? People write about incredibly boring things on their blogs all the time (like [ahem] whether they have a cold or if they are tired or whatever). I don't see that sort of uninteresting commentary fading away any time soon...

-
Ben Bittner

Joey Manley's picture

Quote:
People write about incredibly boring things on their blogs all the time (like [ahem] whether they have a cold or if they are tired or whatever). I don't see that sort of uninteresting commentary fading away any time soon...
Tree falling in the woods. None of us will know it's there (because none of us will be reading it). Except when Scott gets that sick feeling in his stomach and links to the offending article on his homepage ... Joey www.webcomicsnation.com

Wow. Sarcasm, snide remarks and a fat joke.

But I'm the one lacking sophistication.

multiple people can lack sophistication simultaneously!

<a xhref="http://www.kiwisbybeat.com" target=blank>Kiwis by beat!</a>

Joey Manley's picture

I pride myself on lacking sophistication! My next Comicon column is about poopy!

Joey
www.moderntales.com

Quote:
The rest of the accusations being lobbed by Scooter, and even yourself, is nothing more than insecure bullshit masquerading as anti-elitism.

You keep throwing insecurity in our faces as if that's a quality to be ashamed of. In fact, as an artist and creator, it's an important and valued commodity. Insecurity of your own work and its value is what drives most artists to improve and keep to continue creating. It also keeps artists from buying into their own hype. Which can be easy to do if you get any kind of a following.

William, I would propose that you could use a good dose of insecurity.

Quote:
Fact #2: Our current "pros" are the worst representatives of webcomics we can possibly put out there because they still act like fucking fanboys every chance they get. This bullshit is Rob Schnider taking out an ad in Variety telling movie critics that they don't have an opinion on Deuce Bigalowe unless they have a Pulitzer.

Actually, it would be more like if Rob Schneider took out an ad in Variety and told people with Pulitzers that they had mistaken his dick and fart joke movie for a multi-layered allegory on the ramifications of modern social stigmas and how they effect the delicate sexuality of pre-pubecent males. I'm not claiming that PvP is more important that people think. I'm saying that it's less important that these webcomics pundits would like to make it out to be.

Of course, if you want to present webcomics to the world and your goal is to make people aware of how great they are, perhaps it's best to use that opportunity to showcase the BEST we have to offer as a community and not the worst.

And when you do present it...just PRESENT IT. You don't have to talk it up or frame it in some bullshit critical review. Just get it out there and let people digest it. They can decide for themselves if they like it or not.

Quote:
It's not 1999~2001 anymore. And while word of mouth was good enough to get them in the comfortable positions of power they're in now, there are just too many comics, and too many potential readers looking a small section of the internet now for it to work. It takes a hype machine now, and critics are part of that machine... As are collectives like Blank Label. As such, it is a good starting point because THAT'S how people find out about new works. It creates awareness of a product that likely wasn't there to begin with.

You're right. It's not 1999-2001 anymore. Thank god. I think you might have a misconception about how business is here in 2005-2006. It's a lot more stable than it was back in 1999. Things were pretty really terrifying back then.

Things in 2005 are 100% better for PvP both creatively and business wise than they were in 1999. The strip and the business have grown (and grown up, I think). The really scary question is what will things be like in 2010-2011.

Quote:
If they're pros, maybe they should start fucking acting like it instead of kings trying to hold on to their kingdom. Scooter wants his comics to be important, but he's angry because people aren't looking at his work the way he wants them to... That they're acting in ways he cant control...Tough fucking shit.

Wow. Who's really angry here, William? What a horrible picture you have painted of us who experience even a small amount of success. Do you hang that picture and shake your fist at it every night?

Go back and read my post. I mention concern, disappointment and being sick over Joey's column. Never anger. There is more anger in your one paragraph than in my entire post.

Quote:
Fact #3: Them complaining about "teh Drama" is idiotic since 90% of it comes from them anyway. Fucking hypocrites.

I'm not complaining about the drama. I'm concerned about gleefully presenting ourselves at our worst to the rest of the world. Not only that, but presenting it willingly and proudly with a smile. It was sensationalist at best and really fucking stupid and embarassing at worst.

You consider me an idiot, William. Why do you have such trouble interpreting this simpleton's words?

Joey Manley's picture

Poopy, I tell you!

Making poo!

That's my next column! I'm totally serious!

I'm out of control! Somebody better stop me before webcomics is ruined forever! Yaaaaaaaaaargh!

Joey
www.webcomicsnation.com

Quote:
It's a problem (if you want to call it that) with the medium that any amateur can post a review that looks (at least on the surface) just like what a more professional person could do. It's not a phenomenon unique to webcomics.

I agree there, that's part of it. Webcomic critics are not professionals. We're not talking about external critics from some magazine or TV show discovering webcomics and reviewing them for a broader audience. THAT would be a windfall for webcomics. What's happening is the equivalent of some fanfic authors/readers reviewing their favorite fanfics. Fanfic is not going to be held aloft and thrust into the media spotlight by amateur peer review.

Quote:
Fact #3: Them complaining about "teh Drama" is idiotic since 90% of it comes from them anyway. Fucking hypocrites.

Oh, William! I forgot that you're always trying to get cooler heads to prevail. Shame on everyone else! Perpetuating the drama! Meanwhile, let's have another article about what a bunch of kooky hotheads webcartoonists are! (Psst! Ringside seats are available, everyone! A-wink!)

It isn't even that I have a problem with the reviews being written! It's that they get dressed up in a business suit and are presented as Really Important Analysis by Experts.

Actually, let me further qualify that statement -- I might feel less disapproving of these reviews, if it wasn't so easy for me to churn out essays of the form of that "Peanuts" thesis statement I made. If I wanted to, I could write five pages on that topic. It can be done! There might even be some coherence to it. I think that it's possible for any thesis to be supported before a layman audience, using obscure reference. It's not even that I accuse reviewers of this -- it's that there is just no way for the layman to determine if this is the case or not. Thus I don't think even the well-written review is worth very much to the general public, when I write about how Kuehner's use of line evokes so-and-so.

Notice I don't really get on Eric Burns' case about this, because his writing is very inclusive. He reviews, but he reviews as a reader might, with some heart and insight. It's engaging. Some of that may come from the tone he writes with. I don't feel like it's ultra-abstracted art being dissected.

By the way, if people really want to publish critical review pieces on webcomics like professionals, they need editors and proofreaders. Sometimes the points are sturdy, but the articles have poor structure, or don't flow very well. You can't just write ten pages, breathe a happy sigh and post it. It's all still an amateur effort.

So let's don't get ahead of ourselves here. I know everyone wants to believe more, but we're all amateurs. It's up to the outside world to say when we're not; it doesn't matter how many scholarly dissertations we can assemble about ourselves.

Kristofer Straub www.starslip.com

Joey Manley's picture

Are you people ignoring me? Are you deaf?!?

I said POOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPY!

Joey
www.webcomicsnation.com

Joey, we hear you.

Why are you being so indignant in this thread?
You were very introspective and apologetic in private correspondence to me.

But here you're being flippant and sarcastic.

Joey Manley's picture

I apologized for embarrassing you, because, as I said in our correspondence, I hadn't expected that something that is linked from the top of every page on your site would be something you'd be reluctant to have people discuss in public. Frankly, that shocked me. If I had known that this public utterance of yours, which you still publish to this day, was something you'd rather not have in the public realm, I certainly wouldn't have quoted it. But that's the extent of my apology.

As for the larger article, here's what I have to say about your pronouncements on your homepage, and subsequently in other places (semi-private and public):

a). The point of my column is to be entertaining. It is not one of these highfalutin' reviews that are also getting trashed in this thread (there's some confusion, generally -- are we talking about my column throughout most of this thread, or the Webcomics Examiner, because there seems to be an undercurrent of the latter, and my column, which is a wholly different animal, is being used as a club to beat the poor WCE over the head). People liked my column (or, at least, felt compelled to read it). It was one of the more popular items on Pulse before you linked it. It went through the roof, of course, afterwards. Thank you.

b). It was actually quite kind to you, and to the other troublemakers. "Troublemaker" is even used in a way that shows there is some social value to being a gadfly -- keeping all of us on our toes. That even such gentle criticism as that I made of you, evokes this sighing, sicktohisstomach, always-the-victim Scott Kurtz in public, makes me, frankly, sad, and sick to my stomach. Sigh.

c). I don't really write the column to "present webcomics to the larger world." Your analysis of my position seems to be that I've set myself up as a self-appointed ambassador, and that, as an ambassador, I suck. Because an ambassador would never, ever show anybody anything that might be the least bit unpleasant, about the domain he represents. True enough. An ambassador would never do those things. My suckiness as an ambassador isn't an issue for me, though, because I am not your goddam ambassador, and I am certainly not attempting to be your PR manager. I am a guy writing a column of opinion on topics he finds interesting. If other people find those topics interesting, they will read the column, and if they don't, they won't. Now, I understand that the context under which the column is published -- on a website which attracts readers who many webcartoonists, especially those with print deals, would like to woo -- makes it seem like I should be an ambassador. But I didn't take the gig to be a PR hack for webcomics generally, nor for its most successful practitioners. I took the gig to get some things off my chest. I've been too nice too long.

d). Finally, I would submit that there's a lot of self-importance going around in the webcomics world, and that not *all* of it is in the heads and hearts of writers, commentators, or critics. Glass houses. And so on.

e). My next column really is about poopy.

Thanks!

joey
www.moderntales.com

[quote:eef8a7072a="joeymanley"]I took the gig to get some things off my chest. I've been too nice too long.

d). Finally, I would submit that there's a lot of self-importance going around in the webcomics world, and that not *all* of it is in the heads and hearts of writers, commentators, or critics. Glass houses. And so on.

Ooh...is it time to stop being nice and start getting REAL, Joey?

Joey Manley's picture

Zing! Good one, Scott!

Joey
www.webcomicsnation.com

Hey, that's me....the troublemaker.

Joey Manley's picture

;)

Now people are going to be confused as to whether we hate each other or not ...

Joey
www.webcomicsnation.com

If only people would stop filling webcartoonists' heads with glowing, flowery, essay-length reviews, they wouldn't be so self-important!

Kristofer Straub www.starslip.com

Joey Manley's picture

But that is a utopian world we can only dream about ... if we close our eyes, and think sweet thoughts ...

Joey
www.webcomicsnation.com

Sounds like a mouthful of sour grapes and Tall Poppy Syndrome to me. Let's cut down the bigwig so clear more room for the rest of us who probably wouldn't make it that far anyway.

I think I've gathered that Scott is behind pvp or whatever it's called. It sounds as though it's one of the 'big' comics as from what I've read it's been going for six odd years. I haven't read it.

I'm still fairly naive in regards to the inner workings of the webcomic world, but isn't a strip that's been around six odd years one of the First...meaning it's probably because of him and people like him that the webcomic community is as large and apparently popular as it is today? Fair dinkum, if he's earned his success let him have it and stop sulking in corners.

I'd say that those complaining about how hard it is to find audiences because there's so many more out there but just as many strips are forgetting that back then it was probable that the audience was pretty small when the whole genre began. Sort of balances out.

That's my two bob for what it's worth, anyway.

And I didn't use naughty words either! :)

Joey Manley's picture

Try reading the column we're talking about first, Dutch. Then you can have an opinion. Nobody said anything bad about Scott Kurtz's comic or his success. In fact, only nice things were said about those two particular facets of Scott Kurtz. Nor was there any moaning about audiences going to this or that comic. Nope. It was an awards ceremony of sorts, ticking off the five people who make the most trouble in the webcomics world. Very nice things were said about all of them. And also some embarrassing moments were viciously highlighted.

By me.

Poopy!

http://www.comicon.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=39;t=000110

Thanks!

Joey
www.moderntales.com

Can you mention the guest comic I did for Fight Cast or Evade a few years ago, called "People of the Sewer" in your column about poopy, Joey? It features a cute catgirl, the Samurai ethic, haiku poetru and poopy.

Re: Is Scott for real?

EricMillikin's picture

[quote:b68a5b43b0="John"]I can't tell if Scott is satirizing himself or is really pissed off. Is anyone else's sarcasm detector working? I think mine's broken.

Considering the use of the word "eliquantly" on that blog post, I'd say this has gotta be a joke. Taking Joey to task for "public displays of dirty laundry" when the dirty laundry is public beahvior during public flame wars is too surreal not to be parody. As is an artist who, rather then let the art speak for itself, instead writes in his blog that people should "let the work speak for itself." Someone acting like a drama queen on their blog to protest the idea that someone called them a drama queen on some other blog has got to be some sort of gonzo self-deprecating humor, doesn't it?

--------------------------

Fetus-X is the greatest comic in the world.

Re: Is Scott for real?

[quote:c8e8dafa17="EricMillikin"][quote:c8e8dafa17="John"]I can't tell if Scott is satirizing himself or is really pissed off. Is anyone else's sarcasm detector working? I think mine's broken.

Considering the use of the word "eliquantly" on that blog post, I'd say this has gotta be a joke. Taking Joey to task for "public displays of dirty laundry" when the dirty laundry is public beahvior during public flame wars is too surreal not to be parody. As is an artist who, rather then let the art speak for itself, instead writes in his blog that people should "let the work speak for itself." Someone acting like a drama queen on their blog to protest the idea that someone called them a drama queen on some other blog has got to be some sort of gonzo self-deprecating humor, doesn't it?
I never thought of it like that, Eric.

Thank god you're around.

RE: Re: Is Scott for real?

I'm starting to wonder why I care about web comics.

But that might be the burnout caused by writing a Thesis Proposal in 3 days talking.

Scott: I know you don't give a shit about me or my review site. I know you'd rather I drop off the face of the earth since I don't ass-kiss constantly. And it's obvious that you feel that sites such as Websnark and the dozen or other blog sites out there reviewing and talking about comics are a big waste of time. But I think you take all this entirely too seriously at times. If you don't care about criticism... IGNORE IT. Simple as that. Seriously, what does it matter what someone else has to say about you or your comic? *shrug*

Joey: It was an interesting article, and well thought out. I look forward to your article on poop. I'm sure you'll show considerable professionalism and skill while writing it.

Me: I think I need to get drunk. Where'd I hide the booze? *wanders off*

Joey Manley's picture

Ah, I'm afraid I've oversold it. It isn't a comprehensive overview of poopy and webcomics. Actually, it's just a tutorial on how to read webcomics on the toilet, using Sony's Playstation Portable (r) handheld multimedia entertainment device!

Joey
www.webcomicsnation.com

[quote:9c79211f35="Anonymous"]Can you mention the guest comic I did for Fight Cast or Evade a few years ago, called "People of the Sewer" in your column about poopy, Joey? It features a cute catgirl, the Samurai ethic, haiku poetru and poopy.

[quote:056e0639da="joeymanley"]Ah, I'm afraid I've oversold it. It isn't a comprehensive overview of poopy and webcomics. Actually, it's just a tutorial on how to read webcomics on the toilet, using Sony's Playstation Portable (r) handheld multimedia entertainment device!

Bah. I never get any breaks (that was me up there posting anonymously because my password wasn't on the machine I was posting from).

[quote:dbd92e9541="joeymanley"]Try reading the column we're talking about first, Dutch. Then you can have an opinion.

I'm not talking about the article. I'm talking about the way this thread seems intent of slagging off at anybody who seems to have made it big. Just seems people are offended that those who've worked hard to get where they are have their own opinions. The irony is that this is all opinion anyway.

Cheers.

Joey Manley's picture

ah, okay, sorry. Thought you were talking about the article!

It is a little pressurized in here sometimes! Welcome to the webcomics community! (grin).

Joey
www.moderntales.com

Uncle Ghastly's picture

[quote:37b2cd950e="Kurtz"]Wow. Sarcasm, snide remarks and a fat joke.

But I'm the one lacking sophistication.

I believe I sang praises of your sophistication.

I love how William didn't address any of our points, just continued to make snide comments. That's awesome.

Quote:
Scott: I know you don't give a shit about me or my review site. I know you'd rather I drop off the face of the earth since I don't ass-kiss constantly. And it's obvious that you feel that sites such as Websnark and the dozen or other blog sites out there reviewing and talking about comics are a big waste of time. But I think you take all this entirely too seriously at times. If you don't care about criticism... IGNORE IT. Simple as that. Seriously, what does it matter what someone else has to say about you or your comic? *shrug*

Yeah, because that's what I look for in people. Constant ass-kissery.

Man, it must be so cool to be you guys on the cusp of the critical review revolution. You're really making a difference out there, taking the shots at the "kings" of this community. Walking where angels fear to tread. You're not going to play it nice anymore...NO SIR...you're going to tell it like it REALLY is. Because you're HONEST even if it makes you enemies.

William, Tangent, Joey...you guys are truly the light in the dark. If not for you guys....where would we be?

I guess we'd still be enjoying Penny-Arcade, never aware that we were wasting our time with such bullshit.

Thank you. Thank you from saving us....from ourselves.

Joey Manley's picture

You're ... you're welcome, Scott!

{{sniffle}} {{hug}}

Joey
www.webcomicsnation.com

Joey Manley's picture

The poopy column is up now, by the way!

http://www.comicon.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=39;t=000113

Joey
www.webcomicsnation.com

Uncle Ghastly's picture

I, for one, require and demand constant ass-kissery, tight bodied girls in frilly french maid uniforms desireous of erotic bare-bottomed spankings.

EricMillikin's picture

[quote:996a9b76a7="Kurtz"]Man, it must be so cool to be you guys on the cusp of the critical review revolution. You're really making a difference out there, taking the shots at the "kings" of this community.

I haven't read this whole thread, so maybe I'm missing some context on this but Kurtz is absolutely right. It doesn't make you a big shot just because you can launch clumsy attacks at the Kingz of Webcomix. So whoever was taking cheap shots at Derek Kirk Kim, Cat Garza, Roger Langridge, Jason Turner, Drew Weing and Merlin Goodbrey, just knock it the fuck off. That's totally uncalled for and you're totally hurting comics.

--------------------------

Fetus-X is the greatest comic in the world.

Uncle Ghastly's picture

[quote:935abe30f2="EricMillikin"]So whoever was taking cheap shots at Derek Kirk Kim, Cat Garza, Roger Langridge, Jason Turner, Drew Weing and Merlin Goodbrey, just knock it the fuck off. That's totally uncalled for and you're totally hurting comics.

Are we allowed to down cheap shots with them? 'Cause ol' Uncle Ghastly is a might bit parched.

[quote:a270bd3d38="EricMillikin"][quote:a270bd3d38="Kurtz"]Man, it must be so cool to be you guys on the cusp of the critical review revolution. You're really making a difference out there, taking the shots at the "kings" of this community.

I haven't read this whole thread, so maybe I'm missing some context on this but Kurtz is absolutely right. It doesn't make you a big shot just because you can launch clumsy attacks at the Kingz of Webcomix. So whoever was taking cheap shots at Derek Kirk Kim, Cat Garza, Roger Langridge, Jason Turner, Drew Weing and Merlin Goodbrey, just knock it the fuck off. That's totally uncalled for and you're totally hurting comics.

Yeah, Tangent is right. I could really care less if any of you lived or died.
Died would be prefereable I think.

You're all such a bunch of assholes.

Joey Manley's picture

You're parched?!? Try staying up all night screaming POOPY at Scott Kurtz and Kristopher Straub!

Joey
www.webcomicsnation.com