RockMyAmadeus

Off. Da. CHAYIN!

Wow. Just saw the news. You are right. Ever since she first appeared on Attack of the Show, she's had a special place in my heart You mean....OLIVIA MUNN???

Ental's last post was a perfect lock.

No. There's nothing strike worthy there.

Ponzi would be proud.

Oh, no doubt, there was SOME reason behind it. But logic...? They were just throwing things against the walls to see what stuck. When they did things only once, and then abandoned them (which does nothing for your brand imaging), you have to wonder what they were thinking. Well, with Valiant, no you don't. You just have Massarsky saying "PRINT MOAR MONEY!!!!"

You've missed the point. If YOU want to keep something private, keep it private. That's not the issue. You are not bound, however, to keep what people say TO YOU private, simply because they send you a "private" message. The privacy, in that sense, is simply that others cannot access it. Then that is no longer "private": it is between me and myself. Private is private, no matter what. Obviously there is a degree of "public" with posting on the web, even in protected areas or sites, but so it is with paper letters and/or documents. So lets say I purchase a comic from RMA via pm for $100 and pay him but he never ships me the books. I put him up for the PL but he denies ever selling me a book and there is no record of it in a thread. You would be against me posting the pms proving I bought the book?? I have to admit, even in a hypothetical, putting RMA up for the PL does sound appealing! Vaguely unrelated, but I watched the Good Wife last night (yeah, whatevs), and all I can say is...I REALLLLLY want Alicia to take down her party bosses. Really, really bad. I REALLY hope they don't drop that ball, because it would be very fun to watch.

You've missed the point. If YOU want to keep something private, keep it private. That's not the issue. You are not bound, however, to keep what people say TO YOU private, simply because they send you a "private" message. The privacy, in that sense, is simply that others cannot access it. Then that is no longer "private": it is between me and myself. Private is private, no matter what. Obviously there is a degree of "public" with posting on the web, even in protected areas or sites, but so it is with paper letters and/or documents. So lets say I purchase a comic from RMA via pm for $100 and pay him but he never ships me the books. I put him up for the PL but he denies ever selling me a book and there is no record of it in a thread. You would be against me posting the pms proving I bought the book?? I have to admit, even in a hypothetical, putting RMA up for the PL does sound appealing!

Agreed, and I am stealing "rumploader"...fair warning. You'll note, he used the Early Modern English spelling, "Rumpeloader", as in "Ye Olde..." It's a classy touch. I'm pretty sure Falstaff used it to refer to Poins at one point.

And, the gold is "mottled" or "orange peel" in Psi-Lords #1 gold, unlike the gold used for the others. They were experimenting with everything. The consistent thing about Valiant from 1991-1996 is that there is very little consistency. Kept us on our toes.

...and no one should be made to fear consequences for posting in those situations.

Agreed, and I am stealing "rumploader"...fair warning. You'll note, he used the Early Modern English spelling, "Rumpeloader", as in "Ye Olde..."

Aside from your general reasoning "private" means "private", otherwise its public. And no, I would not say at all in public things I am bound to elaborate with some specific person: thats the very sense of "private". I agree Claudio that there is a basic common sense expectation of privacy when somebody here communicates via PM. RMA is also right though that in the specific case of a PL process PMs are often disclosed, and sometimes made to be disclosed to substantiate what was or wasn't promised in a deal. But that's where common sense and the use of the word "private" can be misleading. If you write me a letter, drop it in the mail, and I receive it. No one can open it before it gets to me. It's sent only to me. Once I have it, however, I can do whatever I want with it. Absent some express agreement between the parties this is like putting your personal items in the garbage...you've let them out of your control. The expectation of privacy is gone once you let that letter out of your control and it's in the hands of its intended party. The PM system is simply a way of allowing people to speak to each other directly without having it be in a regular thread. It's not a Cone of Silence. Both parties have to agree to the privacy of the messages before the communication takes place. And even if there is such an agreement I can see waiver if one party comes to a public area and misstates the content of PM communication and the revelation of the PMs becomes necessary to correct an inaccuracy. I agree that there is no obligation to keep confidentiality, I was thinking more of certain customs or "best practices" which even here separate some things out as proper to one or the other, for example, if someone in a sale's thread starts opening negotiation in a thread they will be told to "take it to PM", signifying that it is not a proper subject for public scrutiny. Certainly, yes, after the fact, either one may choose to reveal those terms, so I do see your point. And absolutely, when there is a dispute, it by definition becomes subject to scrutiny. I guess it depends on the person. I treat PMs to me as confidential because I assume that they were directed to me personally for a reason, that does not (or should not) concern others. I do, too. It's part of common courtesy and positive interaction. It's the "GASP! You posted a PRIVATE message publicly, how DARE YOU!!!" from the peanut gallery that I'm addressing here. There is no such expectation of privacy, nor should there be. The things that, for example, Park has shared with me via PM, I do not share with anyone else, out of respect for him and because I value our friendship. I don't want to jeopardize that relationship by making public things we discussed privately (aka, "personal conversations between friends.") That's true even if he does like to roll around naked on Copper age comics. If, however, someone I didn't have a friendship with decided to send me a PM...unsolicited...in which they say less-than-positive things to or about me...they have no right to expect that, just because it was sent through the PM system, I can't make that message public. But some around here behave as if PMs, no matter what the context, are, as comix4fun said, a "Cone of Silence." People have even called for strikes and worse to those who "violate" the "sanctity" of the PM. And that's just ridiculous. Other than personally identifying information that the person has not made public, everything else is, and should be, fair to make public.

Aside from your general reasoning "private" means "private", otherwise its public. And no, I would not say at all in public things I am bound to elaborate with some specific person: thats the very sense of "private". You've missed the point. If YOU want to keep something private, keep it private. That's not the issue. You are not bound, however, to keep what people say TO YOU private, simply because they send you a "private" message. The privacy, in that sense, is simply that others cannot access it.

This thread needs more milkshakes.

By the way....CKB brought up Guardians of the Galaxy #25, which came out around the time of Unity...but Marvel's program was substantially different from Valiant's. The Guardians of the Galaxy #25, for example, has a Direct market "enhanced" version, a non-enhanced Direct version, and a non-enhanced newsstand version. In this case, all three versions are the same price. However, they also had examples where the newsstand was "enhanced" (Silver Surfer #50), and there is no "non-enhanced" version, or there is an "enhanced" version with a higher cover price, while the "regular" and newsstand versions are lower (War Machine #1, etc.) In some cases, even the newsstand got the enhanced treatment, meaning there are FOUR versions (enhanced/non, Direct + newsstand. Avengers #375) And, in some rare cases, the newsstand was the enhanced version, while the non-enhanced only came in Direct. (Thor #475.) In all cases, the Direct market always received the enhanced version.

Make what stuff up? You asked if the Shadowman #0 came in regular, chromium, and gold, and the answer is yes. You then asked if this happened with any of the other books, and the answer is no. Were you expecting a dissertation...? There's nothing more to say. The Shadowman #0 gold is the ugliest gold there is. It's actually Shadowman #0 dingy yellow. Not attractive at all. Can someone tell me the logic behind Shadowman 0? That was the question Rock. That question can't be answered in 1 word replies. Its all good man. Yes that gold cover is ugly as hell. There was no logic behind it. Someone decided it was something they wanted to do. Like many things at Valiant, it was a one-off, not repeated (like Solar #10, Solar #10 second print, the Eternal Warrior #1 double golds, etc.) Though there were reasons for some of these, much of what happened at Valiant was experimental, and didn't follow a set pattern. There are no "non-enhanced" version of any of the other chromium books (X-O #0, Ninjak #1, Psi-Lords #1, Geomancer #1, etc.) It wasn't a "newsstand" version, because, at the time, Valiants weren't being sold on newsstands yet. They had a chromium, a "regular", non-enhanced version, and the gold.

I've said this before: I don't know why many think that PMs are sacrosanct, and cannot be shared publicly. The "private" in "private message" only means that people not invited to that PM aren't able to access it. It's private between you and whomever you are engaged with. It does not mean, nor even imply, that some expectation of enforced privacy on any party involved in the PM is created or maintained through this particular method of communication. The simple rules follows: if you wouldn't say it in public, you probably shouldn't be saying it in private. And if someone sends me a PM, especially an unsolicited one, they should have no expectation that that information is actually private in the sense of not being able to share with others, unless all parties agree otherwise (aka "personal conversations between friends.") Obviously, if a deal falls apart, PMs are going to be important documentation to find out who is really at fault. And if someone defrauds you...they have no right to expect their PMs with you remain "private."

Make what stuff up? You asked if the Shadowman #0 came in regular, chromium, and gold, and the answer is yes. You then asked if this happened with any of the other books, and the answer is no. Were you expecting a dissertation...? There's nothing more to say. The Shadowman #0 gold is the ugliest gold there is. It's actually Shadowman #0 dingy yellow. Not attractive at all.

Anytime.

No.

Yes.

I know you're correct about #23 but I just checked ebay and CGC doesn't mention it which is odd. Just a general note about horseman. I just read but never realized the covers of 24, 25 & 26 are suppose to form a mural. Might look nice to have some CGC copies displayed side by side. X-Factor was, by far, the best part of Fall of the Mutants. By far. Plus, that gorgeous Simonson art.