Yeah......."people here".......you arent dick-ish at all too.......he posted a pic,you wont answer OTHER peoples' questions.....yeah.....aren't at -shocking- all....
Whoa. So you're definition of "dick-ish" is "not answering other people's questions"?
Really? That's the bar where you set "dick-ish"? C'mon. I'm not your "answer-monkey." I've answered a number of your questions in the past. There's no law here-- and I'm under NO obligation-- to answer any of them. Especially some of the questions that you, yourself, have asked in a very loaded way.
Look, I have to get out two to three books a month-- and working on those with my creative team and sweating over all the details-- THAT'S how I'm going to spend most of time at this keyboard. Any time I spend on the internet is extra. I am on a number of sites and I answer a lot of questions over there. Most of the time I spend online interacting with fans are over at Twitter, FB, and CBR (in that order. I also do Formspring once in a blue moon). That's my choice.
Most of the time I'm here on ComicVine it's primarily for 1 reason-- someone is posting some insane shit about the numbers and/or ranking of our book-- stuff that is so off in Conspiracy Loony Land-- that it reaches the point where I pop up and set the record straight. For 9 months we've had what has consistently been Marvel's BEST performing ongoing title. Outside of the GOTG issue that tied into Age of Ultron, brought in a controversial character from the Spawn Universe, AND was co-guest-written by Neil Gaiman, we've had a pretty good streak-- TWICE a month to boot. Everyone in the industry, the trades, the comic web sites, and the majority of the fan base take this as an indisputable fact. For no other reason than... it is. :-)
But there are some out there who feel the need to fabricate some pretty loopy and labyrinthine logic-- where they hold up the (inaccurate) numbers from the monthly estimates and try to convince you that black is white, white is black, and-- basically-- that a book that's doing something that they don't personally like (story-wise) is failing.
They chart this stuff and try to prove to you that since our first issues sold so well-- and sales for those past issues kept INCREASING due to going back to press a number of times OUT OF DEMAND-- that the sales of the current and later issues are POORER (even when they're still the HIGHEST sales for Marvel ongoing titles in those months). It's one of the cleverest ways I've seen someone spin something that everyone else thinks is a STRENGTH and present it as a WEAKNESS since the Swiftboaters made Senator John Kerry's purple hearts sound like a BAD thing.
They try to pass off the standard attrition of any Top 50 title as something UNIQUE to Superior Spider-Man (which is INSANE).
And those are just a couple examples of some of the shell games I see going on here. I'd cite more, but, dear God, that'd have me typing this ALL DAY! (And, oh boy, are they going to have a field day with the September rankings-- where DC practically doubled their output during villain month, with books tied to their Forever Evil event, and released them with a low supply of 3D covers-- causing a mad scramble by retailers to get copies-- and way over-inflating demand. That "Perfect Storm" of criteria is going to see DC books throw the entire September numbers out of whack and play havoc with normal rankings. It probably won't be till the August numbers are released that you'll see the big picture of how much Villains Month altered the regular "weather patterns"-- so to speak. But whatever the case, it will provide the Chicken Littles of the world LOTS of fodder for whatever arguments they'd like to make.)
Look, while the numbers these dissenters are using for a lot of their charts ARE the same numbers that other web sites and places online use to conduct their analyses-- what's really at fault (and I've been consistent about saying this) is their CRITERIA for WHY those numbers perform one way or the other-- their basic lack of knowledge of how the comic industry works and their assumptions for WHY things track the way they do can be laughable. And that's when I feel the need to pop in here, for no other reason than to sort that nonsense out.
I hope you can appreciate that if someone was doing something THIS messed up-- and spreading egregious misinformation about something YOU worked on, that YOU'D want to show up and set the record straight as well. Is that fair?
Can you concentrate on WHAT i am writing?.....really.......
You really think this is about answering?.....i reffered to the frase
as offenssive.And you saying sarcastically "Hey, why don't you hang out here more and answer our questions?" ......THAT'S why i wrote the word "questions" in my reply.Read the text,UNDERSTAND the content,and then write an 8 paragraph reply,to something i didnt mean.
And of cource i respect your choices,how to answer questions.....i just found the oportunity to post some here,when i dont get answers on the official SSM marvel message board a.k.a. your Twitter .... ;-)
(i am not blocked,you just dont see em,or you are bussy to answer them.)
And if you're basic argument is, "If you're NOT our 'answer monkey', you deserve stuff like that picture," that's not a really enticing reason to answer you about anything at all. :-/
ARE YOU FOR REAL MAN!?!.......i NEVER said that,and i never insaulted you in ANY way possible.I never called you names,or whatsoever.So yeah,i find that offensive,and demeaning.When i talk to you,i always try to talk about Spider-Man.Hell,if i were you, i would appreciate,that i am one of the few people here,who talks specifically to you about the characters(or at least i try to talk about them) and not sales numbers,and how it sucks that Peter is dead,and how you suck cause you killed him,and how you mock people in the forums,and ALL this crap.
I have no problem with you,please live a long and happy life,sir.I had a problem with you,in December,but it was fan-rage.I got over it,and it was stupid of me.So,when some weeks ago you said that you're not answering to me,cause i am not respectful to you,i found that not cool,and more specifically wrong.
So no,dear man.....my arguement isnt this,and will never be,something like this.