Most significant X-Men

[kav]

Several times reading this thread I thought 'what would non comic fans think of this whole thing??'

I once saw two HS students get in a fist fight over whether Naruto had whiskers on his face or if they were tattoos....

[Prince Namor]

I've long enjoyed reading your posts, but I've read enough of them to know that you will argue a bad hand into oblivion rather than admit that you're wrong. :

 

 

I have conceded that we are trying to nail down jello, trying to pin down something that is essentially unpindownable, but you state I am undeniably wrong, and won't...or can't...admit it.

 

Interesting.

 

In any event, this is where I bow out of the debate with you. Once the debate becomes about the person, rather than the topic, it's because emotions have become involved, and emotion has no place in a genuine debate. That's what separates a debate from an argument. I no longer have any interest in arguments around here (though I certainly did in the past...and not to my credit.)

 

You're arguing anecdotes, and again...the plural of anecdote is not evidence. If you want to say I'm wrong because I "wasn't there"....that's quite possibly the poorest assertion anyone can make about anything. If that were true, no one could know anything about history...you know, because none of us were there.

 

I will simply say that I am not trying to "downplay" Wolverine's popularity...just report what is, based on the evidence. I believe I've made a very good case for my position. If you want to believe I'm wrong....I'm ok with that. I won't make any commentary about how you conduct yourself in the process.

 

Take care!

 

You're only bowing out of the debate with Delekkerste because you have nothing else to backup your stance. You're challenging the memories of not just Delekkerste, but everyone else who has come out of the woodwork to validate his stated recollection. You then demand data that opposes your stance, and Ironically, you've offered no more data than anyone else to support your own stance, aside from spitting out which issues have Wolverine on the cover. Clearly, this is the heart and soul of your artillery for this particular debate, and I must say, It doesn't hold up. In terms of data, I would much rather side with the point made about Wolverine being introduced in the Secret Wars action figure lineup, as opposed to your argument, which is the number of issues Wolverine appeared on. If it was just Delekkerste relying on his memory to prove a point, then you might actually have something working for you, but multiple people have professed to sharing a similar recollection regarding Wolverines popularity, it's not exclusive to Delekkerste. Take that into your calculations.

 

The absolute worst part of your debate is where you whip out your classic "emotions" card. No one here is getting emotional, and to deploy this tactic as your last line of defense, and using it as your reasoning for bowing out screams defeat, especially when emotions haven't been displayed...at all. Remember, it wasn't too long ago you pulled the emotions card out on me. Is this the cheap shot tactic you desperately revert to whenever your argument fails you?

 

Now, you're accusing people of having a memory shaded by, "natural exaggerations of childhood". Id say thats a borderline insult to these collectors who began reading comics long before you did.

 

 

So using this logic, if I could get a couple of board members together who remember 'The Falcon' as one of the most popular characters in the Marvel Universe during the mid-80's, I could back it up by saying he was introduced into the Secret Wars figure set, and had his own mini-series months after Wolverine did.

 

The number of cover appearances in Captain America was extremely high, and even when he wasn't on the cover, his NAME was.

 

If the memory of those board members believes it... does that make it true?

[gaz973]

I remember reading a comic magazine interview with Claremont on the mid eighties where he commented directly about the popularity of Wolverine. He commented that He was concerned with the possibility of overexposing Wolverine risked undermining the character.

 

Maybe this was why he hadn't been overused previous to this, the interview made it sound like Claremont had been trying to fight the pressure from Marvel to feature him more.

 

 

This is how I saw it too.

 

By the time Wolverine got his own regular series Claremont had lost the good fight with the powers at be at Marvel in terms of keeping his X-universe all tied to himself. I know he started out writing the wolverine ongoing but I don't think it lasted very long. Corporate Marvel knew the key to sales was making Wolverine as big as Spider-Man.

 

Of course back in 83' Wolverine was the number one mutant in the number one book for fans. If anything Claremont tried to downplay his role knowing how popular he had become.

 

If anyone has any actual evidence that demonstrates that Wolverine was "the number one mutant" (and let's not even talk about New Teen Titans, which gave the X-Men a SERIOUS run for their money in the early 80's), by all means, PLEASE share that.

 

A reader poll printed in a magazine, an article from the time posted, any actual DATA which demonstrates this position. It would be much preferable to a lot of "that's how I remember it" statements, especially from childhood memories, which are most unscientific.

 

I would be most interested them!

The magazine interview I was referring to is fact but I haven't had the magazine for many years.

If I can track down which magazine it was then I'll post it here.

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

You're only bowing out of the debate with Delekkerste because you have nothing else to backup your stance. You're challenging the memories of not just Delekkerste, but everyone else who has come out of the woodwork to validate his stated recollection. You then demand data that opposes your stance, and Ironically, you've offered no more data than anyone else to support your own stance, aside from spitting out which issues have Wolverine on the cover. Clearly, this is the heart and soul of your artillery for this particular debate, and I must say, It doesn't hold up. In terms of data, I would much rather side with the point made about Wolverine being introduced in the Secret Wars action figure lineup, as opposed to your argument, which is the number of issues Wolverine appeared on. If it was just Delekkerste relying on his memory to prove a point, then you might actually have something working for you, but multiple people have professed to sharing a similar recollection regarding Wolverines popularity, it's not exclusive to Delekkerste. Take that into your calculations.

 

The absolute worst part of your debate is where you whip out your classic "emotions" card. No one here is getting emotional, and to deploy this tactic as your last line of defense, and using it as your reasoning for bowing out screams defeat, especially when emotions haven't been displayed...at all. Remember, it wasn't too long ago you pulled the emotions card out on me. Is this the cheap shot tactic you desperately revert to whenever your argument fails you?

 

Now, you're accusing people of having a memory shaded by, "natural exaggerations of childhood". Id say thats a borderline insult to these collectors who began reading comics long before you did.

 

 

This is a really excellent example that illustrates how a discussion becomes personal. Look at how many times this person uses the word "you" or "your" in a mere three paragraphs: 24 times. The discussion is no longer about how popular Wolverine was in the early 80's....the discussion is now about a person involved in the discussion. Without going into an in-depth analysis of this post (and it's a veritable goldmine), it's clear from the language that this poster is angry and annoyed, and, incredibly, denies that he (I assume "Darkowl" is a he) is angry and annoyed.

 

When the discussion becomes personal...it's no longer a discussion, and it no longer profits anyone.

 

PS. This is also the reason that a lot of people have relationship problems in real life. Instead of focusing on, and working out, the issue, the discussion invariably turns to personality disputes, the typical "you always/never..." and its many variations rears its ugly head, and the problem that started the discussion is never resolved.

 

It's an absolute relationship killer.

 

If anything is to be learned, it's this: don't make the discussion personal. Don't take things personally that aren't meant personally.

[RockMyAmadeus]

I remember reading a comic magazine interview with Claremont on the mid eighties where he commented directly about the popularity of Wolverine. He commented that He was concerned with the possibility of overexposing Wolverine risked undermining the character.

 

Maybe this was why he hadn't been overused previous to this, the interview made it sound like Claremont had been trying to fight the pressure from Marvel to feature him more.

 

 

This is how I saw it too.

 

By the time Wolverine got his own regular series Claremont had lost the good fight with the powers at be at Marvel in terms of keeping his X-universe all tied to himself. I know he started out writing the wolverine ongoing but I don't think it lasted very long. Corporate Marvel knew the key to sales was making Wolverine as big as Spider-Man.

 

Of course back in 83' Wolverine was the number one mutant in the number one book for fans. If anything Claremont tried to downplay his role knowing how popular he had become.

 

If anyone has any actual evidence that demonstrates that Wolverine was "the number one mutant" (and let's not even talk about New Teen Titans, which gave the X-Men a SERIOUS run for their money in the early 80's), by all means, PLEASE share that.

 

A reader poll printed in a magazine, an article from the time posted, any actual DATA which demonstrates this position. It would be much preferable to a lot of "that's how I remember it" statements, especially from childhood memories, which are most unscientific.

 

I would be most interested them!

The magazine interview I was referring to is fact but I haven't had the magazine for many years.

If I can track down which magazine it was then I'll post it here.

 

Please do, I would be very interested in reading it.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Back to the discussion...

 

I think some of the arguments for Magneto are very compelling.

 

One of the best things Claremont did with the character was take him from a boring, two-dimensional "I will rule the world!" type supervillain, and give him a backstory, flesh and bones, and transform him into a real personality, with real character, depth, and emotions. For the first time (X-Men #150), we understand why Magneto does what he has done, how he came to be who he is, which are the writing aspects that set Marvel apart from DC, at least until the mid 80's.

 

It took a while...his early Claremont excursions were just as two-dimensional as the old Stan Lee, Roy Thomas stories...but eventually, he figured out the character.

 

Making him a Holocaust survivor was pure genius. Who could witness such horror and, given the power to do something about it, not turn out like Erik Magnus Lehnsherr did...?

[Point Five]

Back to the discussion...

 

I think some of the arguments for Magneto are very compelling.

 

One of the best things Claremont did with the character was take him from a boring, two-dimensional "I will rule the world!" type supervillain, and give him a backstory, flesh and bones, and transform him into a real personality, with real character, depth, and emotions. For the first time (X-Men #150), we understand why Magneto does what he has done, how he came to be who he is, which are the writing aspects that set Marvel apart from DC, at least until the mid 80's.

 

It took a while...his early Claremont excursions were just as two-dimensional as the old Stan Lee, Roy Thomas stories...but eventually, he figured out the character.

 

Making him a Holocaust survivor was pure genius. Who could witness such horror and, given the power to do something about it, not turn out like Erik Magnus Lehnsherr did...?

+1. (thumbs u I loved that storyline, and the evolution of his character between #150 and #200. Made a great impression on me at the time.

 

 

[fastballspecial]

Im an old 80s X-men fan.

 

Its Peter and Katya(Kitty). Sorry being a teenager at the time I loved the relationship they had or should have had depending on how you look at it.

(FU Secret Wars )

 

 

Everyone else can say Wolverine, Magneto, Cyclops, Cable and all the others. For me it was always just those two.

 

 

 

[fastballspecial]

Back to the discussion...

 

I think some of the arguments for Magneto are very compelling.

 

One of the best things Claremont did with the character was take him from a boring, two-dimensional "I will rule the world!" type supervillain, and give him a backstory, flesh and bones, and transform him into a real personality, with real character, depth, and emotions. For the first time (X-Men #150), we understand why Magneto does what he has done, how he came to be who he is, which are the writing aspects that set Marvel apart from DC, at least until the mid 80's.

 

It took a while...his early Claremont excursions were just as two-dimensional as the old Stan Lee, Roy Thomas stories...but eventually, he figured out the character.

 

Making him a Holocaust survivor was pure genius. Who could witness such horror and, given the power to do something about it, not turn out like Erik Magnus Lehnsherr did...?

+1. (thumbs u I loved that storyline, and the evolution of his character between #150 and #200. Made a great impression on me at the time.

 

 

A lot of stuff in the X-men films I didn't like, but I LOVED the Magneto beginning/prequel. LOVED IT

 

[delekkerste]

I will simply say that I am not trying to "downplay" Wolverine's popularity...just report what is, based on the evidence. I believe I've made a very good case for my position. If you want to believe I'm wrong....I'm ok with that.

 

I enjoy reading your posts and have nothing against you, RMA, but, for you to argue that Wolverine wasn't the big cheese before the late '80s is simply factually incorrect, like trying to argue to someone who grew up in the 1930s that the Great Depression wasn't all that bad because of whatever tidbits they learned that they believe are more relevant. It has nothing to do with people in their late 30s and 40s idealizing their memories of youth.

 

You ask for polls done back in the day, when, of course, we both know there weren't any. You tally cover appearances and page counts, when, of course, we both know that was a Claremont/editorial decision, not a reflection of fan popularity. It's ridiculous to downplay Wolverine because he wasn't the focus of the Dark Phoenix Saga (even if he arguably stole the show with #133) - if Phoenix was the franchise that Wolverine was, they wouldn't have killed her off! Did we know more about Wolverine than Colossus, Nightcrawler and Storm back then? Well, considering they basically gave Storm her own origin issue in #117, I don't think that's true, and there just wasn't very much to know about Colossus or Nightcrawler anyway. Especially since neither of them was anywhere near the key character that Wolverine was.

 

And Dazzler? Was she the breakout star of 1981 or did people just pre-order and hoard #1 up the wazoo because it was the first direct market sales book and had numerous guest appearances in that and subsequent issues? I can't find sales figures for the Wolverine Mini #1 that came out in 1982, but IIRC, it blew Dazzler #1 out of the water, without any guest appearances.

 

Someone mentioned the Wolverine action figure, but there was also the aforementioned Fastner & Larson solo portfolio plate and numerous house ads (like the subscription form which had Wolverine swinging towards the reader with his claws tearing through the fabric overhead). I'd bet a ton of money as well that much of the fan mail of the day was essentially "more Wolverine, please!" And, because Wolvie hadn't caught on as much initially, remember how the added material and back-up stories in the 1986 "Classic X-Men" series really added to the Wolverine back story. Not a coincidence!

[Westy Steve]

I'm a fan of pre-1990 Wolverine. He's jumped the shark too far now-there's no going back. His story arc is DOA.

 

Maybe this is true. But as collectors, we can pick and choose eras. For example, There are about 20 issues of All American Men of War, or Our Army at War where the heros were fighting with dinosaurs. That's cool as heck! Perhaps that got over-exposed, but history eventually vindicated the coolness of those issues and they go for a premium. They are the only war comics, outside the keys, that I'm interested in as a collector.

 

Same could be said of the early Wolverine. I honestly can't be too concerned about what he's doing today until I've read (and collected) everything he did in the 70's and 80's.

 

Also, bear in mind that...for a time, almost all of the golden age superheros went completely out of style and were discontinued. But we all know the Black Terror is cool...even if they had no place for him in the 1950's.

 

I guess I'm saying that...as collectors...we need to view these questions of who was the most influential through the lens of history, rather than who is most influential today.

 

One more thing in defense of Wolverine. Go to any Walmart and look in the toy aisles. Who do you see on the shelves? Wolverine is always there, whether there is a movie running about him or not.

[Darkowl]

 

You're only bowing out of the debate with Delekkerste because you have nothing else to backup your stance. You're challenging the memories of not just Delekkerste, but everyone else who has come out of the woodwork to validate his stated recollection. You then demand data that opposes your stance, and Ironically, you've offered no more data than anyone else to support your own stance, aside from spitting out which issues have Wolverine on the cover. Clearly, this is the heart and soul of your artillery for this particular debate, and I must say, It doesn't hold up. In terms of data, I would much rather side with the point made about Wolverine being introduced in the Secret Wars action figure lineup, as opposed to your argument, which is the number of issues Wolverine appeared on. If it was just Delekkerste relying on his memory to prove a point, then you might actually have something working for you, but multiple people have professed to sharing a similar recollection regarding Wolverines popularity, it's not exclusive to Delekkerste. Take that into your calculations.

 

The absolute worst part of your debate is where you whip out your classic "emotions" card. No one here is getting emotional, and to deploy this tactic as your last line of defense, and using it as your reasoning for bowing out screams defeat, especially when emotions haven't been displayed...at all. Remember, it wasn't too long ago you pulled the emotions card out on me. Is this the cheap shot tactic you desperately revert to whenever your argument fails you?

 

Now, you're accusing people of having a memory shaded by, "natural exaggerations of childhood". Id say thats a borderline insult to these collectors who began reading comics long before you did.

 

 

This is a really excellent example that illustrates how a discussion becomes personal. Look at how many times this person uses the word "you" or "your" in a mere three paragraphs: 24 times. The discussion is no longer about how popular Wolverine was in the early 80's....the discussion is now about a person involved in the discussion. Without going into an in-depth analysis of this post (and it's a veritable goldmine), it's clear from the language that this poster is angry and annoyed, and, incredibly, denies that he (I assume "Darkowl" is a he) is angry and annoyed.

 

When the discussion becomes personal...it's no longer a discussion, and it no longer profits anyone.

 

PS. This is also the reason that a lot of people have relationship problems in real life. Instead of focusing on, and working out, the issue, the discussion invariably turns to personality disputes, the typical "you always/never..." and its many variations rears its ugly head, and the problem that started the discussion is never resolved.

 

If anything is to be learned, it's this: don't make the discussion personal. Don't take things personally that aren't meant personally.

 

It's an absolute relationship killer.

 

Well, I object to almost everything you've just stated...

 

I'll reiterate. No one here is getting emotional, nor has the slightest degree of the lack of emotional control been displayed. Instead of just assuming that, please prove both me, and Delekkerste wrong, since you are accusing the both of us injecting emotions into this debate. If our words come across as angry, than perhaps you are oversensitive, and you fail to acknowledge what true anger and annoyance really is, which is actually another reason why people have relationship problems. Just as a side tip, you may want to discontinue your habit of self accreditation when you believe people are becoming angry based on the things you say in a comic book chat forum. It's just...silly.

 

"When the discussion becomes personal...it's no longer a discussion, and it no longer profits anyone."

 

Ironically, you were the one who turned the debate into something personal when you accused Delekkerste of allowing his emotions to get involved, when they clearly weren't. You also accused numerous people of having a shaded memory in regards to this subject. How are you profiting anyone with these kinds of remarks?

 

If anything is to be learned, it's this: Don't accuse people of the same negativity that you're guilty of.

 

 

[Darkowl]

I've long enjoyed reading your posts, but I've read enough of them to know that you will argue a bad hand into oblivion rather than admit that you're wrong. :

 

 

I have conceded that we are trying to nail down jello, trying to pin down something that is essentially unpindownable, but you state I am undeniably wrong, and won't...or can't...admit it.

 

Interesting.

 

In any event, this is where I bow out of the debate with you. Once the debate becomes about the person, rather than the topic, it's because emotions have become involved, and emotion has no place in a genuine debate. That's what separates a debate from an argument. I no longer have any interest in arguments around here (though I certainly did in the past...and not to my credit.)

 

You're arguing anecdotes, and again...the plural of anecdote is not evidence. If you want to say I'm wrong because I "wasn't there"....that's quite possibly the poorest assertion anyone can make about anything. If that were true, no one could know anything about history...you know, because none of us were there.

 

I will simply say that I am not trying to "downplay" Wolverine's popularity...just report what is, based on the evidence. I believe I've made a very good case for my position. If you want to believe I'm wrong....I'm ok with that. I won't make any commentary about how you conduct yourself in the process.

 

Take care!

 

You're only bowing out of the debate with Delekkerste because you have nothing else to backup your stance. You're challenging the memories of not just Delekkerste, but everyone else who has come out of the woodwork to validate his stated recollection. You then demand data that opposes your stance, and Ironically, you've offered no more data than anyone else to support your own stance, aside from spitting out which issues have Wolverine on the cover. Clearly, this is the heart and soul of your artillery for this particular debate, and I must say, It doesn't hold up. In terms of data, I would much rather side with the point made about Wolverine being introduced in the Secret Wars action figure lineup, as opposed to your argument, which is the number of issues Wolverine appeared on. If it was just Delekkerste relying on his memory to prove a point, then you might actually have something working for you, but multiple people have professed to sharing a similar recollection regarding Wolverines popularity, it's not exclusive to Delekkerste. Take that into your calculations.

 

The absolute worst part of your debate is where you whip out your classic "emotions" card. No one here is getting emotional, and to deploy this tactic as your last line of defense, and using it as your reasoning for bowing out screams defeat, especially when emotions haven't been displayed...at all. Remember, it wasn't too long ago you pulled the emotions card out on me. Is this the cheap shot tactic you desperately revert to whenever your argument fails you?

 

Now, you're accusing people of having a memory shaded by, "natural exaggerations of childhood". Id say thats a borderline insult to these collectors who began reading comics long before you did.

 

 

So using this logic, if I could get a couple of board members together who remember 'The Falcon' as one of the most popular characters in the Marvel Universe during the mid-80's, I could back it up by saying he was introduced into the Secret Wars figure set, and had his own mini-series months after Wolverine did.

 

The number of cover appearances in Captain America was extremely high, and even when he wasn't on the cover, his NAME was.

 

If the memory of those board members believes it... does that make it true?

 

Does it make it true? Well, it certainly isn't the definition of absolute truth.

 

I never stated that the accumulation of board members sharing their memory in regards to Wolverine's popularity make It true. What I am saying is that I find It incredibly intriguing that numerous board members are agreeing with Delekkerste. The sum of this agreement shouldn't be disregarded, and I believe It is a much more powerful argument than the amount of times Wolverine appears on the cover of a comic book.

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Back to the discussion...

 

I think some of the arguments for Magneto are very compelling.

 

One of the best things Claremont did with the character was take him from a boring, two-dimensional "I will rule the world!" type supervillain, and give him a backstory, flesh and bones, and transform him into a real personality, with real character, depth, and emotions. For the first time (X-Men #150), we understand why Magneto does what he has done, how he came to be who he is, which are the writing aspects that set Marvel apart from DC, at least until the mid 80's.

 

It took a while...his early Claremont excursions were just as two-dimensional as the old Stan Lee, Roy Thomas stories...but eventually, he figured out the character.

 

Making him a Holocaust survivor was pure genius. Who could witness such horror and, given the power to do something about it, not turn out like Erik Magnus Lehnsherr did...?

+1. (thumbs u I loved that storyline, and the evolution of his character between #150 and #200. Made a great impression on me at the time.

 

 

Stan Lee has said that he never looked at Magneto as a villain (which is strange, because that's how he wrote him), and Claremont developing Xavier and Magneto into two sides of the same coin, giving them essentially the same goals and ends, but having two radically different methods to get there, is one of the more brilliant character studies in comics.

 

I mean, truly, it's difficult to not find that kind of character development in comics today (especially by writers like Bendis and Busiek), but back in the late 70's/early 80's, it really was quite innovative and original. X-Men was simply head and shoulders better than everything else that was on the stands for most of that time. Claremont, for all the eventual unintelligible silliness he devolved into, still deserves all the credit he gets (along with Cockrum, Byrne, and the rest.)

[RockMyAmadeus]

I'm a fan of pre-1990 Wolverine. He's jumped the shark too far now-there's no going back. His story arc is DOA.

 

Maybe this is true. But as collectors, we can pick and choose eras. For example, There are about 20 issues of All American Men of War, or Our Army at War where the heros were fighting with dinosaurs. That's cool as heck! Perhaps that got over-exposed, but history eventually vindicated the coolness of those issues and they go for a premium. They are the only war comics, outside the keys, that I'm interested in as a collector..

 

Star Spangled War Stories #90-137, which is, indeed, one of the coolest early Silver Age series out there, even if you only consider the covers.

 

Also, brutally difficult in high grade.

 

[chrisco37]

Back to the discussion...

 

I think some of the arguments for Magneto are very compelling.

 

One of the best things Claremont did with the character was take him from a boring, two-dimensional "I will rule the world!" type supervillain, and give him a backstory, flesh and bones, and transform him into a real personality, with real character, depth, and emotions. For the first time (X-Men #150), we understand why Magneto does what he has done, how he came to be who he is, which are the writing aspects that set Marvel apart from DC, at least until the mid 80's.

 

It took a while...his early Claremont excursions were just as two-dimensional as the old Stan Lee, Roy Thomas stories...but eventually, he figured out the character.

 

Making him a Holocaust survivor was pure genius. Who could witness such horror and, given the power to do something about it, not turn out like Erik Magnus Lehnsherr did...?

+1. (thumbs u I loved that storyline, and the evolution of his character between #150 and #200. Made a great impression on me at the time.

 

 

Stan Lee has said that he never looked at Magneto as a villain (which is strange, because that's how he wrote him), and Claremont developing Xavier and Magneto into two sides of the same coin, giving them essentially the same goals and ends, but having two radically different methods to get there, is one of the more brilliant character studies in comics.

 

I mean, truly, it's difficult to not find that kind of character development in comics today (especially by writers like Bendis and Busiek), but back in the late 70's/early 80's, it really was quite innovative and original. X-Men was simply head and shoulders better than everything else that was on the stands for most of that time. Claremont, for all the eventual unintelligible silliness he devolved into, still deserves all the credit he gets (along with Cockrum, Byrne, and the rest.)

 

I thought I heard (read) somewhere that they were going for a MLK / Malcolm X type thing with Prof X and Magneto.

 

One preached peaceful means whereas the other was more "by any means necessary".

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

You're only bowing out of the debate with Delekkerste because you have nothing else to backup your stance. You're challenging the memories of not just Delekkerste, but everyone else who has come out of the woodwork to validate his stated recollection. You then demand data that opposes your stance, and Ironically, you've offered no more data than anyone else to support your own stance, aside from spitting out which issues have Wolverine on the cover. Clearly, this is the heart and soul of your artillery for this particular debate, and I must say, It doesn't hold up. In terms of data, I would much rather side with the point made about Wolverine being introduced in the Secret Wars action figure lineup, as opposed to your argument, which is the number of issues Wolverine appeared on. If it was just Delekkerste relying on his memory to prove a point, then you might actually have something working for you, but multiple people have professed to sharing a similar recollection regarding Wolverines popularity, it's not exclusive to Delekkerste. Take that into your calculations.

 

The absolute worst part of your debate is where you whip out your classic "emotions" card. No one here is getting emotional, and to deploy this tactic as your last line of defense, and using it as your reasoning for bowing out screams defeat, especially when emotions haven't been displayed...at all. Remember, it wasn't too long ago you pulled the emotions card out on me. Is this the cheap shot tactic you desperately revert to whenever your argument fails you?

 

Now, you're accusing people of having a memory shaded by, "natural exaggerations of childhood". Id say thats a borderline insult to these collectors who began reading comics long before you did.

 

 

This is a really excellent example that illustrates how a discussion becomes personal. Look at how many times this person uses the word "you" or "your" in a mere three paragraphs: 24 times. The discussion is no longer about how popular Wolverine was in the early 80's....the discussion is now about a person involved in the discussion. Without going into an in-depth analysis of this post (and it's a veritable goldmine), it's clear from the language that this poster is angry and annoyed, and, incredibly, denies that he (I assume "Darkowl" is a he) is angry and annoyed.

 

When the discussion becomes personal...it's no longer a discussion, and it no longer profits anyone.

 

PS. This is also the reason that a lot of people have relationship problems in real life. Instead of focusing on, and working out, the issue, the discussion invariably turns to personality disputes, the typical "you always/never..." and its many variations rears its ugly head, and the problem that started the discussion is never resolved.

 

If anything is to be learned, it's this: don't make the discussion personal. Don't take things personally that aren't meant personally.

 

It's an absolute relationship killer.

 

Well, I object to almost everything you've just stated...

 

I'll reiterate. No one here is getting emotional, nor has the slightest degree of the lack of emotional control been displayed. Instead of just assuming that, please prove both me, and Delekkerste wrong, since you are accusing the both of us injecting emotions into this debate. If our words come across as angry, than perhaps you are oversensitive, and you fail to acknowledge what true anger and annoyance really is, which is actually another reason why people have relationship problems. Just as a side tip, you may want to discontinue your habit of self accreditation when you believe people are becoming angry based on the things you say in a comic book chat forum. It's just...silly.

 

"When the discussion becomes personal...it's no longer a discussion, and it no longer profits anyone."

 

Ironically, you were the one who turned the debate into something personal when you accused Delekkerste of allowing his emotions to get involved, when they clearly weren't. You also accused numerous people of having a shaded memory in regards to this subject. How are you profiting anyone with these kinds of remarks?

 

If anything is to be learned, it's this: Don't accuse people of the same negativity that you're guilty of.

 

 

None of this is true, but trying to hash out why would be a waste of time, because you're not interested in working it out. So, I will just say this again: stop making the discussion about the people involved in the discussion, stick to the topic, and you'll have fewer conflicts. If you don't like what someone says, or the way they say it, either make a real effort to resolve it, or ignore it.

 

As Broke says, "why do people have to get confrontational?"

 

[Dr. Balls]

Im an old 80s X-men fan.

 

Its Peter and Katya(Kitty). Sorry being a teenager at the time I loved the relationship they had or should have had depending on how you look at it.

(FU Secret Wars )

 

 

 

+1

 

That whole thing was BS on Peter's part. And I think Wolverine called him out on that several times and Kitty marrying Caliban really made Peter look like an assclown. Whether or not it was planned that way, it had a great "real life" effect on the story - that added some great depth to those two characters. Ahhh, I miss those stories...

[slym2none]

Wolverine taking Peter out to get him drunk and kick his for screwing over KP was awesome. Getting the Juggernaut to do it for him was brilliant.

 

Easily one of my fave one-shot type stories from that era.

 

(thumbs u

 

 

 

-slym

[RockMyAmadeus]

(Allow me to help the "Wolverine was *the* fan favorite X-Man in the early 80's" crowd a bit... )

 

http://www.cbgxtra.com/knowledge-base/for-your-reference/cbg-fan-award-winners-1982-present

 

*NOTE: The results are not scientific.