Taneleer Tivan

Good luck!

I thought that 'Johnson's trilogy' was cancelled (or put "on hold indefinitely")? Isn't allegedly Feige already being stretched thin regarding the Spider-Man divorce? Idk how to feel about this.

16 hours ago, icp004 said:

I’m able to do that type of search using the eBay app.  

Me too.

then*

8 hours ago, Xenosmilus said:

Come on guys! 283 views and only 13 votes!!!

It's not giving me the ability to vote.

Did I vote, not comment, and forget?

1984's Secret Wars would be an interesting concept to adapt. Considering how much and how often they change things I could see it working out with the right writers and director(s). I think the Russo brothers have left the door open to direct another big event for the MCU.

IIRC they were asking for $1,000,000 for the longest time.

4 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

You should have seen the heated debates. Cursing, screaming, flatulence. And the strikes issued all around it was so intense.

It will go down in board history! 

Regarding who/what?

You guys are golden.

1 hour ago, Gatsby77 said:

Where my racists at?

You know...the ones ready to criticize the rumored casting of Jeffrey Wright as Commissioner Gordon?

Whoa, what?

15 hours ago, valiantman said:

@zhamlau looks like @Taneleer Tivan didn't know. 

I don't know if I'm "excited" as much as purely "interested". I'm interested in seeing if they can rebound from TLJ. I'm interested to see if they can somehow honor a finale of a franchise this large, in the same way that Endgame (great), or Game of Thrones (bad).....

I really hope that it entertains me the same way 3-7 did. TLJ is just a very bad movie. An even worse Star Wars movie.

49 minutes ago, zhamlau said:

Its sorta like how folks and the media get all worked up over new I-phone releases...everyone knows that I-phones technically are inferior to many other products(full disclosure I still use a 6), but its the shared cultural experience of the new release that gets folks amped up.

This isn't true.....

7 minutes ago, Gatsby77 said:

Doesn't matter.

This story - like Episodes 7 & 8 - will be written and canonically approved by Pablo Hildalgo and the rest of the Lucasfilm Story Group.

It does matter, though.

29 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

It is. I guess to reflect Harley always has trailing thoughts about a main statement due to her mental state.

What a turn-off.

7 hours ago, zhamlau said:

As long as I get the requisite "Yur Mom" jokes, meaningless throw away complete acts, and impossibly OP Rey acts, Ill be satisfied with TJL 2.0!

Johnson isn't directing this one.

8 hours ago, Xenosmilus said:

Say it an't so Joe! I'm a little behind on this, is Robert Pattinson really going to be the next Batman? WTF!

Yes. I don't have any optimism about it.

Love the show.

Is that subtitle for real?

14 minutes ago, Hollywood1892 said:

I admitted I was wrong for using the tactics I did, I also admitted that had I known what I was doing was wrong than I wouldn't have done it.

I admitted what I thought I was doing was savvy, not unethical or shilling.

Admittance

I was wrong, will I do it again, no

Did I post the thread thinking I was right, Yes

If you are wrong, then that would make the other person..... Right, right?

If the other person is right, why do you have a personal vendetta against someone who "takes sides" as you put it, with that person?

I'm not taking a side, but that other person WAS right. I tend to side with logic and reason, if you wanna put it that way.

3 minutes ago, Hollywood1892 said:

If you take the side of that board member I'm not going to heed your advice, ever! I dont care if you've been in the business 10,000 years or 10 minutes.

So much for admitting when you're wrong.....

2 minutes ago, Hollywood1892 said:

Actually there was mixed reviews on the subject, and while you are in your shell do some research on my interpersonal development with that particular board member and you'll notice a pattern developing where I do not comment on their threads unless it is in a kind manner and they comment on my threads in a condescending one.

Since you didn't heed my advice about thinking about my post.....

The vast majority of us agree that what you did or were doing is unethical.

That user seems to dislike your topic based on, from what I can tell, constantly calling them "SPAM" and "bloviating". I don't really disagree with them there. This thread is a good example.

I don't think it matters WHO starts WHAT thread. If you only started informational threads I don't see how they could barge in obtrusively.

Are you gonna base my posts on my join date, or the fact that I've been in the business for almost 30 years? Since being an internet "newb" seems to be your threshold of accepting advice.....

1 minute ago, Hollywood1892 said:

I dont think that's entirely accurate.

I didnt have ulterior motives.

With that particular poster I am never asking advice, so if that poster says the same advice as someone who's advice I seek than there is a good chance I will be resilient to heeding it.

Yes I do try to fit in because I am pre noobescent when it comes to this hobby

And if I am wrong I promptly admit it

And when it comes to questions of transparency, why would I make a post that puts me in a bad light if I wasnt transparent?

You're not being obsequious then. You're antagonizing someone when you're asking an open forum advice (or claiming that you accept advice) and selectively ignoring based on your emotions rather than logic. Are you not?

You want to fit in, but you want to call out a single person as to separate them from the pack? Do you not see the hypocrisy?

You made that topic because you thought you were right. You even claimed that he/she is wrong. It looks like you were wrong, correct?

You ACT like you're playing nice until it gets to the nitty gritty. Then you reveal your true nature and it's disturbing IMO.

I'll go back to my shell and let you think about this.

7 minutes ago, Hollywood1892 said:

I dont make topics to antagonize that particular poster.

I make topics because I want direction in this hobby.

You wouldn't post certain topics if user didn't expose your ulterior motives tho. Isn't that correct?

You always say he/she is wrong but then you post a topic that proves you're wrong. Doesn't make sense to me.

Didn't you also say "thanks for the advice even if I didn't ask for it"? And you admitted that you get angry at people. You're never consistent or transparent. Always backtracking and trying to fit in instead of being genuine.

Constantly arguing with someone and making topics to antagonize them doesn't seem obsequious to me.