Marvel Universe >> View Post
Post By
Attok12

In Reply To
DragynWulf

Subj: Re: Reading preview pages is not reading the issue. [SPOILERS]
Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 at 09:28:03 am EDT
Reply Subj: Reading preview pages is not reading the issue. [SPOILERS]
Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 at 05:19:19 pm EDT

Previous Post

> > > This is in regards to the responses below regarding the "I hate Rhino" thread (in case it drops off): Despite the fact that everyone ganged up on me and said otherwise, I did read the preview of the SHE-HULK #21 issue at the time I first saw it, and it didn't matter to me what was said in the dialogue. It didn’t matter that Slott wrote the Rhino scene to point out the things I’ve said about the use of the Rhino. The point of the thread was that I hated the Rhino.
> > >
> >
> > The point of the thread was that you hated seeing the Rhino again, when it is NOT the Rhino. Had you actually read the issue you would find this out.
>
> Once again, as I stated in the thread you just responded to, I did read the preview pages. Want me to prove it? Check out this thread:
>

I never said to "read the preview pages", I said "Read the issue". Large difference of what... 15-20 pages.

> Apparently, everyone skipped this thread or refused to acknowledge it. Check the time/date it was posted. Near the same time as the original thread that started this all. It wasn't just added right now. Heck, I even gave Slott props.
>
> >
> > >So, Dragynwulf, my complaint was justified
> >
> > No it wasn't.
>
> I say it was justified, and that's that, so we'll just have to agree to disagree about it.
>

Saying it is justified does not mean that it is indeed justified.

> > >because I was complaining about the Rhino being used yet again for the zillionth time -- it didn't matter what the Rhino was doing and saying in the issue....he was just there.
>
> > >
> >
> > No he was not in the issue. Hence me using "Rhino" in quotes.
>
> And, as stated before, I said I didn't care if it was the real Rhino or not. The character still looked like Rhino and that's all it takes. Seems to me we have another case of people ignoring half of what I wrote and only commenting on the parts one didn't like.
>

No I read what you said. You still complained that it was the Rhino and continue a rant about it. It is not the Rhino. If you are going to rant about something, then at least do it correctly. But read the issue also before you make that rant, because your rant is unjustified because you are ranting about nothing really, because what you are ranting about is not even in the issue.

> >
> > >There was nothing in the original thread about how much I dislike Slott's work. There were no potshots. The thread was about how much I disliked the Rhino. That’s it.
> > >
> >
> > It was complaining about Dan Slott's writing because you were complaining about the Rhino being used "again", when in FACT the Rhino was not used again. Had you taken the time to read the issue you would know exactly what the issue is about instead of jumping to a conclusion of the Rhino being in an issue when in fact he was not.
>
> Once again, I guess I must repeat myself....cut....paste....

READ THE ISSUE... what is confussing about that? I am not the only one to explain this to you. You just chose to act like we don't read what you say instead of getting to the point being made and that point is READ THE ISSUE. Not the previews, but the ISSUE.


Have a Nice Day!
-DragynWulf






> > Apparently, everyone skipped this thread or refused to acknowledge it. Check the time/date it was posted. Near the same time as the original thread that started this all. It wasn't just added right now. Heck, I even gave Slott props.
> >
> > >
> > > >So, Dragynwulf, my complaint was justified
> > >
> > > No it wasn't.
> >
> > I say it was justified, and that's that, so we'll just have to agree to disagree about it.
> >
>
> Saying it is justified does not mean that it is indeed justified.

That may be so, but that's your opinion. And it may be the opinion of everyone else, too. But my opinion is that I say that I'm justified. Whether you and anyone else agree with me or not, which you don't, doesn't make a difference (to me). My opinion is my opinion.

>
> > > >because I was complaining about the Rhino being used yet again for the zillionth time -- it didn't matter what the Rhino was doing and saying in the issue....he was just there.
> >
> > > >
> > >
> > > No he was not in the issue. Hence me using "Rhino" in quotes.
> >
> > And, as stated before, I said I didn't care if it was the real Rhino or not. The character still looked like Rhino and that's all it takes. Seems to me we have another case of people ignoring half of what I wrote and only commenting on the parts one didn't like.
> >
>
> No I read what you said. You still complained that it was the Rhino and continue a rant about it. It is not the Rhino. If you are going to rant about something, then at least do it correctly. But read the issue also before you make that rant, because your rant is unjustified because you are ranting about nothing really, because what you are ranting about is not even in the issue.

Fine. The real Rhino wasn't in the issue. However, the image of the Rhino was in the issue. And I hate the Rhino, image or otherwise. Are we clear on this part now?


>
> > >
> > > >There was nothing in the original thread about how much I dislike Slott's work. There were no potshots. The thread was about how much I disliked the Rhino. That’s it.
> > > >
> > >
> > > It was complaining about Dan Slott's writing because you were complaining about the Rhino being used "again", when in FACT the Rhino was not used again. Had you taken the time to read the issue you would know exactly what the issue is about instead of jumping to a conclusion of the Rhino being in an issue when in fact he was not.
> >
> > Once again, I guess I must repeat myself....cut....paste....
>
> READ THE ISSUE... what is confussing about that? I am not the only one to explain this to you. You just chose to act like we don't read what you say instead of getting to the point being made and that point is READ THE ISSUE. Not the previews, but the ISSUE.

Sorry, I won't waste $2.99 to read the issue of a comic I normally don't buy. I gave that up when I got screwed with NEW AVENGERS: THE ILLUMINATI #4, the issue that featured Madame Masque on the cover and yet didn't actually feature the character in the issue. But I see what you're trying to say. Really. But it doesn't change my opinion on the matter.