[HYPE] John Byrne Joins Slushfactory.com
Brian Jacks
The Slush Factory is very pleased to announce that industry icon John Byrne
will be joining the site as a columnist for the January 15, 2002 relaunch. His
inclusion comes on the heels of the recent announcement that fellow pros Dwayne
McDuffie, Colleen Doran, and Jen Sorensen will also be joining the popular
comic book magazine.
"The pro contingent of Slush reinforces the standing commitment that the site
has to provide its audience with the most varied and interesting comic
experience," said Slush Publisher Brian Jacks. "We are particularly proud of
the addition of Mr. Byrne. We're big fans of his and he'll bring a lot to our
table. I'm sure our audience will feel the same way."
John Byrne is one of the industry's most noted creators. In almost three
decades, he has completed work on hundreds of books, including most of the "Big
Two's" major titles. His previous achievements include classic runs on X-MEN,
CAPTAIN AMERICA, AVENGERS, WEST COAST AVENGERS, SUPERMAN, THE SENSATIONAL
SHE-HULK, and an expansive five-year run on FANTASTIC FOUR. Following his work
for Marvel and DC, he launched his creator-owned series NEXT MEN that went onto
critical acclaim. Most recently his works have included AMAZING SPIDER-MAN,
HULK, SPIDER-WOMAN, SUPERMAN & BATMAN: GENERATIONS (VOL. 1 & 2), and X-MEN: THE
HIDDEN YEARS. Byrne's latest creator-owned monthly series, LAB RATS, will debut
April 2002 from DC Comics.
--------------------
The Slush Factory will bring to its audience exclusive columns, in-depth
interviews, daily news, reviews, and more on a brand new website. Opening week
festivities will include prize giveaways.
Be sure to head over to http://www.slushfactory.com and sign up for our mailing
list to stay on top of all the latest developments.
The online magazine that "Entertainment Weekly" proclaimed "brightens the
four-color world," launches January 15, 2002.
For more information contact Brian Jacks (sl...@slushfactory.com) or visit
Slushfactory.com.
Flashfire
Anyone taking bets on how long Byrne'll stick it out?
James
-----------
Remove 'motion' from e-mail address to reply via e-mail.
Johanna Draper Carlson
> to toss the entire magazine aside because of who's on our opinion staff is
> absurd.
Yet you're expecting people to visit the entire magazine because of who
you've announced on your opinion staff so far. If someone said "wow, Byrne,
that's great, I'll make sure to check out your entire site!" I doubt your
response would be "he's only one contributor, the rest of it will be
different."
The point of attracting name-brand talent is to attract visitors. The flip
side of that is that name-brand talent may also turn off visitors. Look at
the problems SpinnerRack.com has had with Rob Liefeld being involved; there
are people who won't visit the site because of that one contributor.
Johanna Draper Carlson joh...@comicsworthreading.com
Reviews of Comics Worth Reading -- http://www.comicsworthreading.com
Flashfire
>> absurd.
Johanna:
>Yet you're expecting people to visit the entire magazine because of who
>you've announced on your opinion staff so far. If someone said "wow, Byrne,
>that's great, I'll make sure to check out your entire site!" I doubt your
>response would be "he's only one contributor, the rest of it will be
>different."
>
>The point of attracting name-brand talent is to attract visitors. The flip
>side of that is that name-brand talent may also turn off visitors. Look at
>the problems SpinnerRack.com has had with Rob Liefeld being involved; there
>are people who won't visit the site because of that one contributor.
I've got to agree with Johanna here. If anyone wants to put forth the notion
that people should visit a site and check it out because of the announcement of
a Name, that person doesn't get to cry foul when people say they /won't/ visit
the site because of the announcement of a Name. You can't have it one way
only, Brian.
Brian Jacks
>If anyone wants to put forth the notion
>that people should visit a site and check it out because of the announcement
>of
>a Name, that person doesn't get to cry foul when people say they /won't/
>visit
>the site because of the announcement of a Name. You can't have it one way
>only, Brian.
Of course I can because the two have nothing to do with each other.
-Brian
Flashfire
>>that people should visit a site and check it out because of the announcement
>>of
>>a Name, that person doesn't get to cry foul when people say they /won't/
>>visit
>>the site because of the announcement of a Name. You can't have it one way
>>only, Brian.
Brian:
>Of course I can because the two have nothing to do with each other.
Sure they do. But if you're determined to disagree, explain why they have
nothing to do with each other. Explain why you can expect people to come to
your site and read other content because you got John Byrne on board, but you
can't accept people refusing to visit the site because you got John Byrne on
board.
You're hoping people will react to seeing a Name by coming to your site and
checking out other content, but you're unable and unwilling to accept that the
very same Name may encourage people NOT to come to your site and check out
other content.
Brian Jacks
>Sure they do. But if you're determined to disagree, explain why they have
>nothing to do with each other.
I'm not playing this silly little game. If Sears advertises that they now
carry Dell, and you dislike Dell, would you swear off visiting the entire
store? Only with fanboys...
-Brian
ATKokmen
> If Sears advertises that they now
>carry Dell, and you dislike Dell, would you swear off visiting the entire
>store? Only with fanboys...
It's not a position I share, but to be fair, it's hardly limited to comics
fanboys. People have been known to discontinue newspaper and
magazine subscriptions because they come to dislike the
writings of individual columnists or contributors; that's a far more
analagous scenario to the one people are talking about here that
the Sears retail one.
IMO, it's very much an overreaction for people to stop visiting
a website based solely on the identity of one of its contributors
(particularly when that contributor hasn't written anything yet.)
But, also IMO, it's very naive for a publisher (print or internet) to
think that there won't be people who decide to avoid its publications
based on the identity of their contributors. Sure, you can and should
try to persuade them to visit regardless of their initial feelings, but
the fact that some people aren't going to read your stuff--for
reasons you think are totally absurd--is part and parcel of being
a publisher.
My two cents only...
ATK
_______
"There is only one requirement for any of us, and that is to be
courageous...And I believe, because I've done a little of this myself,
pretending to be courageous is just as good as the real thing."
--David Letterman, 17 September 2001
Flashfire
>I'm not playing this silly little game.
If it were only as silly as you're deluding yourself into thinking...
>If Sears advertises that they now
>carry Dell, and you dislike Dell, would you swear off visiting the entire
>store? Only with fanboys...
I would hope you can see that using an example of Sears is a little different
than the example of Slushfactory.com. Like someone else has already noted,
it's not an uncommon thing when newspapers are involved. You might be
surprised how many people write to their papers and threaten to discontinue
their subscriptions because they don't like certain comic strips, columnists,
or editorials. You may think it lame, but it's a problem people in journalism
have to face.
I think your own reactions to this whole scenario speak pretty clearly. You
act like everyone to race to your site and read what John's got to say, and
that's fine. That's to be expected from a press release or PR announcement.
But you view them with disdain if they're turned off by that. Nice.
PAL
is half-empty,' while the other thinks 'glass is half full.'
One is negative while the other is positive.
See where I'm coming from?
Some people center on the positive things, while others center on the
negative. While the positive things can almost always can be proven, the
negative things are almost always based on hearsay.
Keep in mind that this is my view about the fans/non-fans of John Byrne, and
although it can be applied in many other circumstances, we're here to
'discuss' comic books and comic book-related subjects...right?
Anyway, I feel that John Byrne fans are the 'glass is half-full' types,
while the non-fans are 'glass is half-empty' types.
To stay with the subject, since you're obviously the 'glass is half-empty'
type, in regards to John Byrne, I can understand where you're coming from in
regards to SlushFactory, and their acquiring JB as a contributor. You wish
to dwell on your perceived negativity, while fans of JB wish to dwell on
their perceived positivism.
I don't know about you (I know about your online persona, though), but I
think dwelling on the positive is the way to go.
~PAL
"Flashfire" <wolf0...@aol.commotion> wrote in message
news:20011223215708...@mb-ch.aol.com...
JVV4sm
Oh? You've hyped that someone is about to begin a column at your website.
You're hoping that information will draw people to your site, but that
information can have the opposite effect, as it has in my case.
JVV4sm
>while the non-fans are 'glass is half-empty' types.
Well, that's a pointless generalization. Are you saying that all John Byrne
fans are optimists, and anyone who doesn't like John Byrne's work are
pessimists?
Flashfire
>I don't know about you (I know about your online persona, though), but I
>think dwelling on the positive is the way to go.
So I'm some sort of negative person because I'm not a fan of Byrne's? Nice
logic, buddy-boy.
As far as Slushfactory.com is concerned, I haven't checked it out at any other
point in time prior to this, so whether or not Byrne contributes to the site
has no bearing on what I do. I was merely making a point or two in my
disagreement with Brian's POV.
So, kindly take your "You're negative and pessimistic because you don't like
Byrne" stuff and shove it.
Merry Christmas.
PAL
better?
~PAL
"JVV4sm" <jvv...@aol.comNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:20011224165647...@mb-fc.aol.com...
PAL
attitude.
Logic has never been your strong suit when it comes to your biased
inflammatory nature in regards to John Byrne, so give up on that one.
Happy Holidays!
~PAL
"Flashfire" <wolf0...@aol.commotion> wrote in message
news:20011224210715...@mb-fi.aol.com...
PAL
SlushFactory, you'd totally disregard the other talents that will also be
contributing to the site?
Your close-minded nature just may keep you from reading and enjoying columns
from other well-respected talents.
Too bad.
~PAL
"JVV4sm" <jvv...@aol.comNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:20011224165349...@mb-fc.aol.com...
Flashfire
>Okay, ya got me there. Change it to 'most' fans and 'most' non-fans. Feel
>better?
Change it to 'some' and you might find more agreement.
Flashfire
>Thanks for pretty much proving my point with your negative & pessimistic
>attitude.
You didn't have anything proven, there. I put forth a real, legitimate POV
that does take place.
>Logic has never been your strong suit when it comes to your biased
>inflammatory nature in regards to John Byrne, so give up on that one.
Certainly not because you say so. I've always outdone Byrne in any debate I've
had with him. I became bored with it after a while.
Monk
Just to jump in here with my two cents. By hyping Byrne joining, in an
effort to get people to check out the site, all he's really saying is
that if you like Byrne you might want to check it out. I'd understand
someone who doesn't like Byrne swearing off the site if Byrne were
taking it over, or in some way influencing the other things on the
site. But that's not the case. I visit Spinnerrack even though I
tend to disagree with most of Liefeld's views about comics because I
like the rest of the site, and I don't have to read Rob's opinions.
Same with Slushfactory.
Matt Linton
John Thorenson
>> You're hoping that information will draw people to your site, but that
>> information can have the opposite effect, as it has in my case.
I doubt Brian is overly concerned with whether a gigantic hypocritical asshole
idiot visits his site or not. The problem is that you don't post in a vaccum.
Anyone who would like to see what all the ruckus is about can plug your name
into a search engine and see the kind of horrible shit you've spewed on this
board for two years. Your patronage is unwelcome pretty much anywhere you go,
so I'd say mission accomplished for him. Thanks for being such a tool.
__
"The major problem is that millions of people will have already played these
games on the PS2 by the time the Xbox versions come out." Shane, Gamespot.com
letters, 11/29/01
Christopher Basken
written with the same font, size, and style, and without prefixes to
indicate who's speaking? Makes it cumbersome to read.
--
Chris_Basken________________
www.animalkingdoms.com
"Brian Jacks" <viper...@aol.comakazi> wrote in message
news:20011221081533...@mb-cu.aol.com...
JVV4sm
>So, just because John Byrne will be writing an online column for
>SlushFactory, you'd totally disregard the other talents that will also be
>contributing to the site?
>Your close-minded nature just may keep you from reading and enjoying columns
>from other well-respected talents.
>Too bad.
>
Y'know, there are 6 billion people in the world, and I don't mind if I miss the
internet comments of a handful of them. There are other things to read besides
web columns.
JVV4sm
pleasantries?
PAL
side with the one they are admiring, right? The odds, logically, would be
greater than 50%, ergo, most.
~PAL
"Flashfire" <wolf0...@aol.commotion> wrote in message
news:20011225180138...@mb-cu.aol.com...
PAL
"Flashfire" <wolf0...@aol.commotion> wrote in message
> PAL:
> >Thanks for pretty much proving my point with your negative & pessimistic
> >attitude.
>
> You didn't have anything proven, there. I put forth a real, legitimate
POV
> that does take place.
And it was negative wasn't it?
> >Logic has never been your strong suit when it comes to your biased
> >inflammatory nature in regards to John Byrne, so give up on that one.
>
> Certainly not because you say so. I've always outdone Byrne in any debate
I've
> had with him. I became bored with it after a while.
What's it like living in a fantasy world. I've always wondered.
~PAL
Brian Jacks
>Just out of curiosity, why are the questions and answers in your interviews
>written with the same font, size, and style, and without prefixes to
>indicate who's speaking? Makes it cumbersome to read.
Are you talking to me? If you are I'm not sure what you're talking about.
Every one of our over 50 interviews is done in the same format. Questions in
bold, answers in regular font. Makes it quite easy to see who's talking.
-Brian
JVV4sm
Keep in mind that Byrne that likes to speak in absolutes and rarely backs up
his claims with examples. Both of these tendencies will lose plenty of
debates.
A good example of this would be Byrne's complaint that PAD's Spider-Man 2099
didn't include the lead character in costume in the first issue. After
repeated examples to the contrary (usually when Byrne drops out of the
debate), Byrne replied to PAD that he was still right because he only looked
through Spider-Man 2099 #1, and it 'felt' as though he wasn't in costume
'enough.' Not a winning debate style.
Talon The Merciful
viper...@aol.comakazi says...
>>If anyone wants to put forth the notion
>>that people should visit a site and check it out because of the announcement
>>of
>>a Name, that person doesn't get to cry foul when people say they /won't/
>>visit
>>the site because of the announcement of a Name. You can't have it one way
>>only, Brian.
>
>Of course I can because the two have nothing to do with each other.
Absolutely. But then any reasonable person can see that. An emotional person
will let one person keep them away from one hundred others and then justify it
with nonsense.
Talon T M
Absolute Ruler of RACM
Christopher Basken
interviews
> >written with the same font, size, and style, and without prefixes to
> >indicate who's speaking? Makes it cumbersome to read.
>
> Are you talking to me? If you are I'm not sure what you're talking about.
> Every one of our over 50 interviews is done in the same format. Questions
in
> bold, answers in regular font. Makes it quite easy to see who's talking.
Oops, sorry, my mistake. I was using Opera. It looks fine under IE.
--
Chris_Basken________________
www.animalkingdoms.com
Brian Jacks
>Oops, sorry, my mistake. I was using Opera. It looks fine under IE.
The bold doesn't show up in Opera? That's weird. I used standard bold tags,
should work in any browser. Then again, I've never had any experience with
Opera so I'm not sure what needs to be done to make a page compliant in it.
-Brian
Allen Hui
a long time. Just because a creator is willing to write a column for a site, it is often seen as the
site's endorsement of the columnists opinions whether that is the case or not. The most important thing
is to make sure this line is clearly defined as well as to make sure opinions expressed are valid. They
may be crazy or completely inflammatory but as long as the viewpoint is valid (whether it is sound is up
to the reader to decide), it should be expressed and used as a launching pad for a civilized
discussion. Oh wait, I forgot this was the internet we're talking about here! Maybe I should rethink
this...
-Allen
http://www.SpinnerRack.com
Allen Hui
You've been at this a little longer than I have so I'm not sure if what I say
holds much water. John Byrne is sure to bring your site a lot of traffic.
It's just a shame that the opinions of a columnist will always be associated
with the site that hosts the column regardless of whether that is the case.
When people hear about Spinner Rack, the first thing out of anyone's mouth is
"Hey, isn't that the Rob Liefeld site?" Or when they mention another popular
site, you hear, "Hey, isn't that the site that kisses Marvel's ass?" All this
because of the columnists and hardly ever because of other things a website
offers. Expect the same for Slushfactory. Now if Slushfactory.com agrees with
everything John Byrne says, then cool. If not, it might be more difficult
weathering the storm. Every site gets hate mail, so now yours will have
targeted hate mail. No big deal. Again, you've been in this game longer so
you probably already know this. Good luck with Slushfactory and it's great to
see another familiar site back on the block to promote comics.
-Allen
http://www.SpinnerRack.com
John Thorenson
>"Hey, isn't that the Rob Liefeld site?"
That's the first thing out of idiots' mouths. Normal people can wait for the
neurons to stop firing and separate the site from the columnists.
Allen Hui
even those that post on our boards seem to associate our site with Rob Liefeld.
I'm glad there are people who know the difference between a columnist and the site
that hosts the column. Unfortunately, far too many of those people don't voice
their opinion on this matter. I certainly hope the same kind of immediate
association that has followed Spinner Rack doesn't happen to Slushfactory. Then
again, this kind of thing will always happen so I guess it's a moot point.
Talon The Merciful
says...
>
>Y'know, there are 6 billion people in the world, and I don't mind if I miss the
>internet comments of a handful of them. There are other things to read besides
>web columns.
So what makes you think that the website will miss *you*?
JVV4sm
When did I say that?
Christopher Basken
>
> The bold doesn't show up in Opera? That's weird. I used standard bold
tags,
> should work in any browser. Then again, I've never had any experience
with
> Opera so I'm not sure what needs to be done to make a page compliant in
it.
That would explain it. <b> and <i> for bold and italic aren't W3C HTML
standards. They're old Netscape-isms that got incorporated into IE, but
Opera was designed only with W3C standards in mind. Technically, you should
be using <strong> and <em>, respectively.
Of course, Opera is something like, at best, .05% of the browsers out there,
so it's not like it's a huge issue.
--
Chris_Basken________________
www.animalkingdoms.com