Legitimate Non-Threatening Questions Posed To Matt Nelson

[FFB]

For those that missed it, from earlier today (link):

 

Hi Mark, I don't see the need to answer your questions. I'm not going to change your mind, and you're not going to change mine. I'm not on trial here either. The definition matter has been laid to rest; horse particles are being picked out of the concrete at this point.

 

Like your earlier comment about suing me, I'm not really sure how to take your sting operation comment. I don't understand why you're hell-bent on attacking me, or trying to catch me doing something. I wish you'd just chill out and deal some funny books like the rest of us. Leave the hard line at work.

 

If you disagree with the way I do business, let's agree to disagree, shake hands and have a few beers at San Diego.

 

If I'm being fair here, I'd have to say that Matt really should actually provide the answers. He's right in his assessment, but if he wants to take the high road, then he needs to come on and just answer the questions directly that Mark posed, because he said he would.

 

Make it the last round, no follow ups, and basically tell Mark he's putting him on ignore and let's move on...

 

But as I said earlier, posting you won't answer the questions doesn't really fulfill the promise he made offline. That's my problem.

 

I may disagree with Mark over the nature of the pressing -- but where we don't disagree is that people have to be taken at their word and to follow through if they explicitly stated that they would.

 

I take the other view. Whether Matt initially said he'd respond or not, he reserves the right to change his mind if he thinks the game isn't worth the candle -- and it isn't.

[Flaming_Telepath]

I take the other view. Whether Matt initially said he'd respond or not, he reserves the right to change his mind if he thinks the game isn't worth the candle -- and it isn't.

 

What does it matter what it's 'worth' to Matt?

 

Surely the whole issue here is one of integrity, honesty and open, ethical behaviour? Y'know...like your word having some value and actually meaning something.

 

Hey, at the moment, Matt insists that he will disclose what he knows of a book's history when asked. Obviously, it would be 'worth' more to him if he didn't...or he simply lied.

 

I await him exercising his 'right to change his mind'....

[Thegoldenage]

I take the other view. Whether Matt initially said he'd respond or not, he reserves the right to change his mind if he thinks the game isn't worth the candle -- and it isn't.

 

I gotta agree with you on this one FFB. After reading through this thread, I think that Matt coming on here would be suicide. It's hardly a non-prejudicial thread. And of course he can change his mind. That is his decision to make and no one elses.

[FFB]

I take the other view. Whether Matt initially said he'd respond or not, he reserves the right to change his mind if he thinks the game isn't worth the candle -- and it isn't.

 

What does it matter what it's 'worth' to Matt?

 

Surely the whole issue here is one of integrity, honesty and open, ethical behaviour? Y'know...like your word having some value and actually meaning something.

 

Hey, at the moment, Matt insists that he will disclose what he knows of a book's history when asked. Obviously, it would be 'worth' more to him if he didn't...or he simply lied.

 

I await him exercising his 'right to change his mind'....

 

Please. This is not about Matt keeping his "promise" to respond to Mark's questions.

 

The point I took from what Matt said is that he doesn't believe that he owes it to any of you to be drawn into another lengthy and pointless debate. I agree with him on that.

 

You guys know his position on these issues by now, and you simply disagree with him and want to draw him into another fight. If by some miracle you still don't understand his position (whether or not you agree with it), it's either willful ignorance or you just haven't been paying attention.

[Shield]

I'm sure he's just really busy!

 

[esquirecomics]

For those that missed it, from earlier today (link):

 

Hi Mark, I don't see the need to answer your questions. I'm not going to change your mind, and you're not going to change mine. I'm not on trial here either. The definition matter has been laid to rest; horse particles are being picked out of the concrete at this point.

 

Like your earlier comment about suing me, I'm not really sure how to take your sting operation comment. I don't understand why you're hell-bent on attacking me, or trying to catch me doing something. I wish you'd just chill out and deal some funny books like the rest of us. Leave the hard line at work.

 

If you disagree with the way I do business, let's agree to disagree, shake hands and have a few beers at San Diego.

 

Matt, your response is unfortunate on so many different levels. You are well aware this is not a personal issue between us. It is not about attacking anyone. It never has been, though some have tried to make it out to be and I recognize it has been beneficial for you to follow that line of deflective thought to avoid participating in a nonconfrontational, professional substantive discussion which is all I have ever sought to engender.

 

I don't know from what textbook you are reading that leads you to believe the definition matter has been laid to rest, particularly because you have refused to answer simple questions I would believe any expert would have no problems sharing his opinions regarding, but simply because certain board members continue to promote that view will not stop the discussion. As I believe will be clear from next year's Overstreet Guide (the one that sets the industry standards), the debate is quite alive and a mature substantive discussion is to be encouraged. Hopefully one day you will see fit to participate. In the interim your absence will no doubt be obvious and raise questions. But that is certainly your choice to make.

 

And I would be happy to share some beers with you in San Diego.

[esquirecomics]

For those that missed it, from earlier today (link):

 

Hi Mark, I don't see the need to answer your questions. I'm not going to change your mind, and you're not going to change mine. I'm not on trial here either. The definition matter has been laid to rest; horse particles are being picked out of the concrete at this point.

 

Like your earlier comment about suing me, I'm not really sure how to take your sting operation comment. I don't understand why you're hell-bent on attacking me, or trying to catch me doing something. I wish you'd just chill out and deal some funny books like the rest of us. Leave the hard line at work.

 

If you disagree with the way I do business, let's agree to disagree, shake hands and have a few beers at San Diego.

 

If I'm being fair here, I'd have to say that Matt really should actually provide the answers. He's right in his assessment, but if he wants to take the high road, then he needs to come on and just answer the questions directly that Mark posed, because he said he would.

 

Make it the last round, no follow ups, and basically tell Mark he's putting him on ignore and let's move on...

 

But as I said earlier, posting you won't answer the questions doesn't really fulfill the promise he made offline. That's my problem.

 

I may disagree with Mark over the nature of the pressing -- but where we don't disagree is that people have to be taken at their word and to follow through if they explicitly stated that they would.

 

I take the other view. Whether Matt initially said he'd respond or not, he reserves the right to change his mind if he thinks the game isn't worth the candle -- and it isn't.

 

Well, that says it all doesn't it. Ok everyone, break it up. Break it up. Go home. Scott says we are done here. We should listen to our elders.

[FlyingDonut]

For those that missed it, from earlier today (link):

 

Hi Mark, I don't see the need to answer your questions. I'm not going to change your mind, and you're not going to change mine. I'm not on trial here either. The definition matter has been laid to rest; horse particles are being picked out of the concrete at this point.

 

Like your earlier comment about suing me, I'm not really sure how to take your sting operation comment. I don't understand why you're hell-bent on attacking me, or trying to catch me doing something. I wish you'd just chill out and deal some funny books like the rest of us. Leave the hard line at work.

 

If you disagree with the way I do business, let's agree to disagree, shake hands and have a few beers at San Diego.

 

If I'm being fair here, I'd have to say that Matt really should actually provide the answers. He's right in his assessment, but if he wants to take the high road, then he needs to come on and just answer the questions directly that Mark posed, because he said he would.

 

Make it the last round, no follow ups, and basically tell Mark he's putting him on ignore and let's move on...

 

But as I said earlier, posting you won't answer the questions doesn't really fulfill the promise he made offline. That's my problem.

 

I may disagree with Mark over the nature of the pressing -- but where we don't disagree is that people have to be taken at their word and to follow through if they explicitly stated that they would.

 

I take the other view. Whether Matt initially said he'd respond or not, he reserves the right to change his mind if he thinks the game isn't worth the candle -- and it isn't.

 

Well, that says it all doesn't it. Ok everyone, break it up. Break it up. Go home. Scott says we are done here. We should listen to our elders.

 

yes you should.

 

Mark and I had dinner tonight with another friend of ours, and I boiled the entire discussion on this over the past six months to a five second sound bite, which got all the points in. I'll happily discuss with others later. There was beer involved.

[esquirecomics]

Setting aside the matter of whether it is beneficial to Matt to respond to my questions, the answer to which can indeed have differing reasonable viewpoints, does anyone truly believe the questions I posed standing alone are inappropriate?

 

Were I to moderate a panel discussion on restoration, does anyone hold the view that asking the panel members to indicate what they believe the definition of "conservation" to be is out of line?

 

Or to discuss whether or not there is a need or reason from an expert point of view to follow an accepted definition or practice set by an industry leader? Or instead to follow a contrary view or practice?

 

There may indeed be some on these boards who are looking to pick a fight with Matt or others, or even to simply bust his chops no matter what his responses might be, but all I was looking for were simple answers to very simple questions.

 

And even if Matt has, in your opinion, answered the questions elsewhere, and I personally don't believe he has, does that make the questions inappropriate or offensive?

 

All I know if that when I ask Susan Cicconi, Tracey Heft or any of the number of restoration/conservation experts I have spoken to at the Library of Congress and elsewhere, these same questions and others of a substantive nature, there is no hesitation in providing their own expert opinions and the basis for it.

 

Even if they have been asked the same question by others or have provided their opinions elsewhere (that perhaps I do not know of).

[FFB]

Setting aside the matter of whether it is beneficial to Matt to respond to my questions, the answer to which can indeed have differing reasonable viewpoints, does anyone truly believe the questions I posed standing alone are inappropriate?

 

Were I to moderate a panel discussion on restoration, does anyone hold the view that asking the panel members to indicate what they believe the definition of "conservation" to be is out of line?

 

Or to discuss whether or not there is a need or reason from an expert point of view to follow an accepted definition or practice set by an industry leader? Or instead to follow a contrary view or practice?

 

There may indeed be some on these boards who are looking to pick a fight with Matt or others, or even to simply bust his chops no matter what his responses might be, but all I was looking for were simple answers to very simple questions.

 

And even if Matt has, in your opinion, answered the questions elsewhere, and I personally don't believe he has, does that make the questions inappropriate or offensive?

 

All I know if that when I ask Susan Cicconi, Tracey Heft or any of the number of restoration/conservation experts I have spoken to at the Library of Congress and elsewhere, these same questions and others of a substantive nature, there is no hesitation in providing their own expert opinions and the basis for it.

 

Even if they have been asked the same question by others or have provided their opinions elsewhere (that perhaps I do not know of).

 

If it's truly the case that all you want is for him to answer your questions, then call him and ask him yourself instead of making post after post after post about how disappointed you are that he won't come here on the boards and take part in another round of "pile on Matt and tell him how much you hate his business practices." That may not be what you intend, but you know very well that it's exactly what several others are going to do.

 

And since he's already said that he doesn't intend to come here and answer your questions on the boards, give it a rest already. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who's tired of hearing about it and it's bordering on harassing now. Isn't there another topic related to comics toward which you could devote some posting time?

[october]

[sterlingcomics]

Isn't there another topic related to comics toward which you could devote some posting time?

 

Lord, I hope so. No offense, Mark.

[esquirecomics]

Setting aside the matter of whether it is beneficial to Matt to respond to my questions, the answer to which can indeed have differing reasonable viewpoints, does anyone truly believe the questions I posed standing alone are inappropriate?

 

Were I to moderate a panel discussion on restoration, does anyone hold the view that asking the panel members to indicate what they believe the definition of "conservation" to be is out of line?

 

Or to discuss whether or not there is a need or reason from an expert point of view to follow an accepted definition or practice set by an industry leader? Or instead to follow a contrary view or practice?

 

There may indeed be some on these boards who are looking to pick a fight with Matt or others, or even to simply bust his chops no matter what his responses might be, but all I was looking for were simple answers to very simple questions.

 

And even if Matt has, in your opinion, answered the questions elsewhere, and I personally don't believe he has, does that make the questions inappropriate or offensive?

 

All I know if that when I ask Susan Cicconi, Tracey Heft or any of the number of restoration/conservation experts I have spoken to at the Library of Congress and elsewhere, these same questions and others of a substantive nature, there is no hesitation in providing their own expert opinions and the basis for it.

 

Even if they have been asked the same question by others or have provided their opinions elsewhere (that perhaps I do not know of).

 

If it's truly the case that all you want is for him to answer your questions, then call him and ask him yourself instead of making post after post after post about how disappointed you are that he won't come here on the boards and take part in another round of "pile on Matt and tell him how much you hate his business practices." That may not be what you intend, but you know very well that it's exactly what several others are going to do.

 

And since he's already said that he doesn't intend to come here and answer your questions on the boards, give it a rest already. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who's tired of hearing about it and it's bordering on harassing now. Isn't there another topic related to comics toward which you could devote some posting time?

 

The purpose of a public debate/discussion is to be "public" and foster "debate/discussion".

 

I can't control, anymore than you can, whether others "pile on Matt and tell him how much you hate his business practices." I've said repeatedly that I disagree with anyone who pursues this approach.

 

Its regretable that you are "tired of hearing about it" Scott, but get the heck out of this thread already then. I started this thread for a purpose. I put the big BEWARE OF PRESSING sign as the first post. I have not been going around posting in muliple threads about this specific discussion. Except for one post in the restoration section that prompted Matt to respond, all the posts have been right here. That you, or others, may be sick of it is really no concern of mine. While I am more than happy and willing to take into consideration your substantive opinions on these topics, this type of complaint has no impact.

 

That being said, Matt has responded - albeit, unfortunately, with a non response - so I have no interest or desire to "harass him" further with a countdown ""

 

So, on to another topic.

 

On the 30th anniversary of Spiderman vs Superman, have times changed significantly to alter the outcome? Talks amongst yourselves. Better?

[THE_BEYONDER]

On the 30th anniversary of Spiderman vs Superman, have times changed significantly to alter the outcome?

 

That's not a bad question.....

[esquirecomics]

On the 30th anniversary of Spiderman vs Superman, have times changed significantly to alter the outcome?

 

That's not a bad question.....

 

Then I shall indeed pose it.

[ShoNuff-migration]

What do you get when you put a bunch of lawyers in a forum with a large white dragon?

[skinny_white_boy]

What do you get when you put a bunch of lawyers in a forum with a large white dragon?

[ShoNuff-migration]

The Neverending Thread.

[esquirecomics]

What do you get when you put a bunch of lawyers in a forum with a large white dragon?

 

Who is the large white dragon?

 

Actually, you don't even need that reference. Any bunch of lawyers anywhere creates a neverending situation!

[ShoNuff-migration]

Who is the large white dragon?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luckdragon

 

Or did you mean which poster is the large white dragon?