1st Teen Titans 3 3

[sfcityduck]

I found this kind of interesting.

I find the Teen Titans Archives vol. 1 (starts with BB 54) and Teen Titans: A Celebration of 50 Years (keys off of BB 54) much more interesting.

 

Why? We already know that the conventional wisdom says BB 54 is their first appearance. Lazyboy's citation is, actually, more interesting, because it's an example of a departure from the norm. Now, that said, comics.org is the single most authoritative source for comics info. And they don't consider BB 54 the first appearance of the Teen Titans. If I were interested in the Teen Titans, I'd definitely find that interesting.

 

You have got to be kidding! Comics.org is a wiki. And it sure looks to me like someone out there is manipulating every wiki they can find to try and create the appearance that BB 60 is the first Teen Titans. It's a sad example of market manipulation if that is what is happening.

 

Out of curiousity, what would make you say comics.org is a wiki?

 

Because of the way comics.org describes itself on its web page and its "documentation wiki." Most notably, because indexing is all done by volunteers. It's a classic wiki. A wiki is a website which allows collaborative modification of its content and structure directly from the web browser. We can all modify comics.org. In fact, I should become an indexer so I can fix bad entries.

 

 

Edited September 8, 2015 by sfcityduck

[HighStakesComics]

I found this kind of interesting.

I find the Teen Titans Archives vol. 1 (starts with BB 54) and Teen Titans: A Celebration of 50 Years (keys off of BB 54) much more interesting.

 

Why? We already know that the conventional wisdom says BB 54 is their first appearance. Lazyboy's citation is, actually, more interesting, because it's an example of a departure from the norm. Now, that said, comics.org is the single most authoritative source for comics info. And they don't consider BB 54 the first appearance of the Teen Titans. If I were interested in the Teen Titans, I'd definitely find that interesting.

 

You have got to be kidding! Comics.org is a wiki. And it sure looks to me like someone out there is manipulating every wiki they can find to try and create the appearance that BB 60 is the first Teen Titans. It's a sad example of market manipulation if that is what is happening.

 

Out of curiousity, what would make you say comics.org is a wiki?

 

Because of the way comics.org describes itself on its web page and its "documentation wiki." Most notably, because indexing is all done by volunteers. It's a classic wiki. A wiki is a website which allows collaborative modification of its content and structure directly from the web browser. We can all modify comics.org. In I should probably fix the bad entries.

 

 

So you are saying comics.org can be edited unconditionally without any checks and balances?

 

[nearmint]

I found this kind of interesting.

I find the Teen Titans Archives vol. 1 (starts with BB 54) and Teen Titans: A Celebration of 50 Years (keys off of BB 54) much more interesting.

 

Why? We already know that the conventional wisdom says BB 54 is their first appearance. Lazyboy's citation is, actually, more interesting, because it's an example of a departure from the norm. Now, that said, comics.org is the single most authoritative source for comics info. And they don't consider BB 54 the first appearance of the Teen Titans. If I were interested in the Teen Titans, I'd definitely find that interesting.

 

You have got to be kidding! Comics.org is a wiki. And it sure looks to me like someone out there is manipulating every wiki they can find to try and create the appearance that BB 60 is the first Teen Titans. It's a sad example of market manipulation if that is what is happening.

 

Out of curiousity, what would make you say comics.org is a wiki?

 

Because of the way comics.org describes itself on its web page and its "documentation wiki." Most notably, because indexing is all done by volunteers. It's a classic wiki. A wiki is a website which allows collaborative modification of its content and structure directly from the web browser. We can all modify comics.org. In I should probably fix the bad entries.

 

 

So you are saying comics.org can be edited unconditionally without any checks and balances?

 

You have to be approved as an "indexer".

[HighStakesComics]

It also appears an editor needs to approve any changes by the indexer. Im not an indexer or an editor, but it would appear that at least two parties would need to be in agreement in order to facilitate a change. Here's the fine print:

[sfcityduck]

Why? We already know that the conventional wisdom says BB 54 is their first appearance. Lazyboy's citation is, actually, more interesting, because it's an example of a departure from the norm. Now, that said, comics.org is the single most authoritative source for comics info. And they don't consider BB 54 the first appearance of the Teen Titans. If I were interested in the Teen Titans, I'd definitely find that interesting.

I'm not trying to debate which was the first appearance, I'm more trying to learn in this instance. That being said, comics.org is not infallible. I think the indexers and editors there do a terrific job of compiling data, but how would they know any more than those of us here which comic was the first appearance other than by their own interpretation and perspective?

 

Well, by their experience for one thing. Meaning, they've read a lot of comic books and so have more experience than newbies do at determining what distinguishes a Superhero Team from a superhero team-up.

 

Secondly, their high profile ensures that they are liable to get pushback from fellow experts if/when they screw something up. So, these two factors and related factors are what help give them more credibility than some average schmo.

 

In other words, empiricism and epistemology matter. Not everything is mere opinion.

 

Your assertions about expertise of the indexers might have some grounding in fact if you knew the identity of the indexer who wrote that BB 60 was the first TT appearance ... but, you have no idea who wrote that. Your post is rank speculation. It could well have been a "newbie" or a "market manipulator" or just some well-intentioned soul, but it likely wasn't one of the many many many very experienced dealers or scholars who, like DC and OPG, have concluded BB 54 is the first Teen Titans.

[sfcityduck]

It also appears an editor needs to approve any changes by the indexer. Im not an indexer or an editor, but it would appear that at least two parties would need to be in agreement in order to facilitate a change.

 

It is not unusual for wiki's to have volunteer editors who have the power to approve or delete contributor edits.

[Lazyboy]

Why? We already know that the conventional wisdom says BB 54 is their first appearance. Lazyboy's citation is, actually, more interesting, because it's an example of a departure from the norm. Now, that said, comics.org is the single most authoritative source for comics info. And they don't consider BB 54 the first appearance of the Teen Titans. If I were interested in the Teen Titans, I'd definitely find that interesting.

I'm not trying to debate which was the first appearance, I'm more trying to learn in this instance. That being said, comics.org is not infallible. I think the indexers and editors there do a terrific job of compiling data, but how would they know any more than those of us here which comic was the first appearance other than by their own interpretation and perspective?

 

Well, by their experience for one thing. Meaning, they've read a lot of comic books and so have more experience than newbies do at determining what distinguishes a Superhero Team from a superhero team-up.

 

Secondly, their high profile ensures that they are liable to get pushback from fellow experts if/when they screw something up. So, these two factors and related factors are what help give them more credibility than some average schmo.

 

In other words, empiricism and epistemology matter. Not everything is mere opinion.

 

Your assertions about expertise of the indexers might have some grounding in fact if you knew the identity of the indexer who wrote that BB 60 was the first TT appearance ... but, you have no idea who wrote that. Your post is rank speculation. It could well have been a "newbie" or a "market manipulator" or just some well-intentioned soul, but it likely wasn't one of the many many many very experienced dealers or scholars who, like DC and OPG, have concluded BB 54 is the first Teen Titans.

 

Look harder.

 

Or just continue to propagate decades-old misinformation.

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

You have got to be kidding! Comics.org is a wiki. And it sure looks to me like someone out there is manipulating every wiki they can find to try and create the appearance that BB 60 is the first Teen Titans. It's a sad example of market manipulation if that is what is happening.

 

You constantly ascribe nefarious motives to everyone who disagrees with you. If people are changing resources online to reflect the fact that #60 is the Teen Titans' first appearance, it's likely because they believe that to be correct, not because of some sinister "market manipulation."

 

I don't know if SFCD has ascribed nefarious motives in other discussions, so I can't say if he "constantly ascribes" them, but at the very least, he does allow that it is only a possibility, rather than a foregone conclusion, by saying "if that is what is happening."

 

You're probably seeing these changes happen a lot because you're wrong and they are right. It doesn't mean that there's some evil conspiracy by villainous grifters.

 

 

How do you know? How can you say that with any degree of certainty? Because it "seems reasonable"? History has proven, countless times, that what "seems reasonable" isn't the motive behind most human behavior.

 

SFCD doesn't say beyond any doubt that that is what is happening, he only says that it looks like that is what is happening, and any reasonable person should be inclined to agree: if the choice of motives is between genuine belief and self-interest, self-interest wins (almost) every time.

 

And....it doesn't even have to be one or the other, and can be a combination of both (and more!)

 

No, you say, unequivocally, that SFCD is wrong, and others are right, despite SFCD's position having the weight of the very author of the original story and decades of tradition behind him, while these nouveau deconstructionists seek to change nearly every accepted definition in this hobby, for purposes one can only guess at. SFCD allows for the possibility that his view on those making changes may be just perception; you allow no such thing.

 

And you're calling him screwy....? That doesn't seem very fair, does it?

 

 

 

[HighStakesComics]

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=4956279#Post4956279

 

[VintageComics]

 

You sure do care a lot about the topic.

[HighStakesComics]

 

You sure do care a lot about the topic.

 

I was thinking the same thing about you and Duck

 

 

[VintageComics]

 

You sure do care a lot about the topic.

 

I was thinking the same thing about you and Duck

 

 

Me? I stated what I believe and why and then dropped out.

[passion4comics]

86 pages..... Seriously.... It took less time to pass United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181. They're still fighting about it so I guess this thread still has some steam.

[RockMyAmadeus]

86 pages.....

 

Now you're just being stubborn...

[Lazyboy]

 

You have got to be kidding! Comics.org is a wiki. And it sure looks to me like someone out there is manipulating every wiki they can find to try and create the appearance that BB 60 is the first Teen Titans. It's a sad example of market manipulation if that is what is happening.

 

You constantly ascribe nefarious motives to everyone who disagrees with you. If people are changing resources online to reflect the fact that #60 is the Teen Titans' first appearance, it's likely because they believe that to be correct, not because of some sinister "market manipulation."

 

I don't know if SFCD has ascribed nefarious motives in other discussions, so I can't say if he "constantly ascribes" them, but at the very least, he does allow that it is only a possibility, rather than a foregone conclusion, by saying "if that is what is happening."

 

You're probably seeing these changes happen a lot because you're wrong and they are right. It doesn't mean that there's some evil conspiracy by villainous grifters.

 

 

How do you know? How can you say that with any degree of certainty? Because it "seems reasonable"? History has proven, countless times, that what "seems reasonable" isn't the motive behind most human behavior.

 

SFCD doesn't say beyond any doubt that that is what is happening, he only says that it looks like that is what is happening, and any reasonable person should be inclined to agree: if the choice of motives is between genuine belief and self-interest, self-interest wins (almost) every time.

 

And....it doesn't even have to be one or the other, and can be a combination of both (and more!)

 

No, you say, unequivocally, that SFCD is wrong, and others are right, despite SFCD's position having the weight of the very author of the original story and decades of tradition behind him, while these nouveau deconstructionists seek to change nearly every accepted definition in this hobby, for purposes one can only guess at. SFCD allows for the possibility that his view on those making changes may be just perception; you allow no such thing.

 

And you're calling him screwy....? That doesn't seem very fair, does it?

 

 

 

 

Who are you? Have you hurt RMA? Is he still alive?

 

You are arguing in favour of memory (some interview from how long after the fact) and "tradition" started by... somebody?

 

Again, Haney wrote BB 60, which includes a panel which suggests the Teen Titans did not exist in name or form until after BB 54. Certainly BB 54 was a step in that direction, but most journeys require more than one step.

[Crimebuster]

 

You have got to be kidding! Comics.org is a wiki. And it sure looks to me like someone out there is manipulating every wiki they can find to try and create the appearance that BB 60 is the first Teen Titans. It's a sad example of market manipulation if that is what is happening.

 

You constantly ascribe nefarious motives to everyone who disagrees with you. If people are changing resources online to reflect the fact that #60 is the Teen Titans' first appearance, it's likely because they believe that to be correct, not because of some sinister "market manipulation."

 

I don't know if SFCD has ascribed nefarious motives in other discussions, so I can't say if he "constantly ascribes" them, but at the very least, he does allow that it is only a possibility, rather than a foregone conclusion, by saying "if that is what is happening."

 

You're probably seeing these changes happen a lot because you're wrong and they are right. It doesn't mean that there's some evil conspiracy by villainous grifters.

 

 

How do you know? How can you say that with any degree of certainty? Because it "seems reasonable"? History has proven, countless times, that what "seems reasonable" isn't the motive behind most human behavior.

 

SFCD doesn't say beyond any doubt that that is what is happening, he only says that it looks like that is what is happening, and any reasonable person should be inclined to agree: if the choice of motives is between genuine belief and self-interest, self-interest wins (almost) every time.

 

And....it doesn't even have to be one or the other, and can be a combination of both (and more!)

 

No, you say, unequivocally, that SFCD is wrong, and others are right, despite SFCD's position having the weight of the very author of the original story and decades of tradition behind him, while these nouveau deconstructionists seek to change nearly every accepted definition in this hobby, for purposes one can only guess at. SFCD allows for the possibility that his view on those making changes may be just perception; you allow no such thing.

 

And you're calling him screwy....? That doesn't seem very fair, does it?

 

 

 

 

I almost took this seriously until I realized you are just doing an Onion-style parody of SFCD. Well done.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

You have got to be kidding! Comics.org is a wiki. And it sure looks to me like someone out there is manipulating every wiki they can find to try and create the appearance that BB 60 is the first Teen Titans. It's a sad example of market manipulation if that is what is happening.

 

You constantly ascribe nefarious motives to everyone who disagrees with you. If people are changing resources online to reflect the fact that #60 is the Teen Titans' first appearance, it's likely because they believe that to be correct, not because of some sinister "market manipulation."

 

I don't know if SFCD has ascribed nefarious motives in other discussions, so I can't say if he "constantly ascribes" them, but at the very least, he does allow that it is only a possibility, rather than a foregone conclusion, by saying "if that is what is happening."

 

You're probably seeing these changes happen a lot because you're wrong and they are right. It doesn't mean that there's some evil conspiracy by villainous grifters.

 

 

How do you know? How can you say that with any degree of certainty? Because it "seems reasonable"? History has proven, countless times, that what "seems reasonable" isn't the motive behind most human behavior.

 

SFCD doesn't say beyond any doubt that that is what is happening, he only says that it looks like that is what is happening, and any reasonable person should be inclined to agree: if the choice of motives is between genuine belief and self-interest, self-interest wins (almost) every time.

 

And....it doesn't even have to be one or the other, and can be a combination of both (and more!)

 

No, you say, unequivocally, that SFCD is wrong, and others are right, despite SFCD's position having the weight of the very author of the original story and decades of tradition behind him, while these nouveau deconstructionists seek to change nearly every accepted definition in this hobby, for purposes one can only guess at. SFCD allows for the possibility that his view on those making changes may be just perception; you allow no such thing.

 

And you're calling him screwy....? That doesn't seem very fair, does it?

 

 

 

 

Who are you? Have you hurt RMA? Is he still alive?

 

You are arguing in favour of memory (some interview from how long after the fact) and "tradition" started by... somebody?

 

Again, Haney wrote BB 60, which includes a panel which suggests the Teen Titans did not exist in name or form until after BB 54. Certainly BB 54 was a step in that direction, but most journeys require more than one step.

 

Haney is still the author. That's not the same as, say, Joe_Collector "remembering" that ASM #129 sold on eBay for $25 in 1999.

 

I completely doubt that this much thought was given to the situation by Haney when he wrote these books, and he certainly wasn't trying to make a definitive claim on when (B&B #54, "sometime between" B&B #54 and #60, or #60) the Teen Titans actually became the Teen Titans.

 

The team worked. They added Wondy in #60 and came up with a name. They may not have been "the Teen Titans" by name in #54, but clearly #54 is the genesis of the team, from whence the idea came.

 

Call it a prototype, call it a preview, call it an after-the-fact retcon, but the origin of the team...by reference, author intent, and tradition...is #54.

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

You have got to be kidding! Comics.org is a wiki. And it sure looks to me like someone out there is manipulating every wiki they can find to try and create the appearance that BB 60 is the first Teen Titans. It's a sad example of market manipulation if that is what is happening.

 

You constantly ascribe nefarious motives to everyone who disagrees with you. If people are changing resources online to reflect the fact that #60 is the Teen Titans' first appearance, it's likely because they believe that to be correct, not because of some sinister "market manipulation."

 

I don't know if SFCD has ascribed nefarious motives in other discussions, so I can't say if he "constantly ascribes" them, but at the very least, he does allow that it is only a possibility, rather than a foregone conclusion, by saying "if that is what is happening."

 

You're probably seeing these changes happen a lot because you're wrong and they are right. It doesn't mean that there's some evil conspiracy by villainous grifters.

 

 

How do you know? How can you say that with any degree of certainty? Because it "seems reasonable"? History has proven, countless times, that what "seems reasonable" isn't the motive behind most human behavior.

 

SFCD doesn't say beyond any doubt that that is what is happening, he only says that it looks like that is what is happening, and any reasonable person should be inclined to agree: if the choice of motives is between genuine belief and self-interest, self-interest wins (almost) every time.

 

And....it doesn't even have to be one or the other, and can be a combination of both (and more!)

 

No, you say, unequivocally, that SFCD is wrong, and others are right, despite SFCD's position having the weight of the very author of the original story and decades of tradition behind him, while these nouveau deconstructionists seek to change nearly every accepted definition in this hobby, for purposes one can only guess at. SFCD allows for the possibility that his view on those making changes may be just perception; you allow no such thing.

 

And you're calling him screwy....? That doesn't seem very fair, does it?

 

 

 

 

I almost took this seriously until I realized you are just doing an Onion-style parody of SFCD. Well done.

 

 

 

No.

[HighStakesComics]

Does the Haney interview predate the OPG change in 1980?

[sfcityduck]

Does the Haney interview predate the OPG change in 1980?

 

There was no OPB "change." The OPB did not denote a "first appearance" of the Teen Titans in any comic until 1980. 1980 was the year that the amount of information offered by the OPB in its listings exploded in volume due to a switch to smaller fonts and, it appears, better use of computers.