InsaneJournal

Tweak says, "THIS IS CAAAAAAKETOWN!"

blake_reitz (blake_reitz) wrote in scans_daily,
@ 2009-11-07 23:31:00

Entry tags:

char: impulse/kid flash/bart allen, char: superboy/kon-el/conner kent, creator: todd dezago, creator: todd nauck, publisher: dc comics, title: young justice

Some perfectly legal Young Justice
As much as I love YJ, there is an obvious barrier to me posting it here. Luckily, there's a handful of pages from Young Justice #22, by Todd's Dezago and Nauck.

The setup: This issue is pretty much filler after a major story arc (Sins of Youth), guesting various writers and artists. Superboy lost his powers, and is getting by on gadgets from Cadamus. While other characters are off learning lessons with their older counterparts, Bart and Secret decide to help out...

Funny, I never thought how Kon's costume here resembles his current pants and shirt "costume".

(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

	bluefall 2009-11-08 06:15 am UTC (link)
	Personally, if Voldy wants to shoot himself in the foot by reducing his word-of-mouth and thereby his royalties, I'm happy to help. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	scottyquick 2009-11-08 06:18 am UTC (link)
	It took me a second, and then I LOLed. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	shanejayell 2009-11-08 06:26 am UTC (link)
	Me too. ^__^ Yeah, since 'he who must not be named' shut down the old SD, I've not bought anything by him. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	bluefall 2009-11-08 06:29 am UTC (link)
	I might have forgiven that, if it hadn't been followed so closely by "pseuds mean you're a worthless coward" and the super-special "you're a bigot for not buying my computer game." I still love YJ with all my heart, but I've lost any interest whatsoever in following him to anything new ever again. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	parsimonia 2009-11-08 06:38 am UTC (link)
	I just find it hilarious that people who write superheroes for a living get pissed off about people wanting to keep their real names private. They always come off like those frantic politicians or newspeople in comics who say shit like "UNMASK THE BATMAN! If he wasn't a criminal he wouldn't NEED to wear a mask!" Not that we're superheroes. XD (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	ninjapeps 2009-11-08 07:14 am UTC (link)
	WE'RE NOT?!? LIES! (Reply to this) (Parent)

	kamino_neko 2009-11-09 04:28 am UTC (link)
	Well, I am. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

(no subject) -

parsimonia, 2009-11-09 04:30 am UTC

(no subject) -

kamino_neko, 2009-11-09 04:42 am UTC

(no subject) -

parsimonia, 2009-11-09 04:56 am UTC

	ninjapeps 2009-11-08 07:14 am UTC (link)
	"you're a bigot for not buying my computer game." eh? what's that about? (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

bluefall
2009-11-08 07:23 am UTC (link)

Orson Scott Card, known bigot and psycho Mormon who considers prison too good for folks like me and puts his money where his mouth is, has a computer game out, name of Shadow Complex, which is in some way involved in the wider storyarc of OSC's Empire novels.

PAD wrote the script for the game.

Once it was discovered that OSC would be making money off of this game, the word went out through the gay community that "hey, you know, if you buy this, you're putting money in Card's pocket, which he's going to use to perpetuate your oppression. JTLYK." Queer gamers the world over went "oh. Damn. Good to know. Huh. Not sure if I'll buy it now; anyway, gonna spread the word."

PAD decided that this was somehow oppressing OSC's free speech, or being bigoted toward homophobes, or something equally stupid that really didn't fool anyone into not noticing that all he actually meant was "you're mean for not giving me money, what do you mean I should take responsibility for who I get in bed with when I sign on to a project."

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

(no subject) -

ninjapeps, 2009-11-08 07:27 am UTC

(no subject) -

gargoylekitty, 2009-11-08 07:47 am UTC

(no subject) -

gargoylekitty, 2009-11-08 08:13 am UTC

(no subject) -

bluefall, 2009-11-08 10:16 am UTC

(no subject) -

scottyquick, 2009-11-08 04:11 pm UTC

I don't think that's what's being said here. -

nefrekeptah, 2009-11-08 07:40 pm UTC

Re: I don't think that's what's being said here. -

scottyquick, 2009-11-08 10:17 pm UTC

Re: I don't think that's what's being said here. -

jlbarnett, 2009-11-09 12:34 am UTC

Re: I don't think that's what's being said here. -

galateus, 2009-11-08 11:12 pm UTC

(no subject) -

kingrockwell, 2009-11-09 04:22 am UTC

(no subject) -

zordboy, 2009-11-08 11:04 am UTC

(no subject) -

mcspakypants, 2009-11-08 04:59 pm UTC

(no subject) -

interrobamf, 2009-11-08 11:39 pm UTC

(no subject) -

mxlm, 2009-11-09 05:13 am UTC

(no subject) -

janegray, 2009-11-09 10:05 pm UTC

	drsevarius 2009-11-09 02:54 am UTC (link)
	"you're a bigot for not buying my computer game." What did he say? (Reply to this) (Parent)

	parsimonia 2009-11-08 06:53 am UTC (link)
	There must be something wrong with me that whenever I see anyone refer to Peter David as "he who must not be named", even in jest, I want to quote the HP books to them and say that "fear of the name only increases the fear of the thing itself". headdesk (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	bluefall 2009-11-08 07:16 am UTC (link)
	Clearly. Especially since it turned out there was a good reason not to say "Voldemort," and (in a world full of vanity googling) a strikingly comparable reason for us to avoid PAD's name as well. -.0 (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

(no subject) -

parsimonia, 2009-11-08 07:22 am UTC

(no subject) -

merrickm, 2009-11-08 07:26 am UTC

(no subject) -

parsimonia, 2009-11-08 07:27 am UTC

(no subject) -

requiem2adream, 2009-11-08 01:32 pm UTC

(no subject) -

agharta75, 2009-11-08 04:07 pm UTC

(no subject) -

jlbarnett, 2009-11-09 12:25 am UTC

(no subject) -

scottyquick, 2009-11-08 04:23 pm UTC

(no subject) -

parsimonia, 2009-11-08 05:20 pm UTC

(no subject) -

scottyquick, 2009-11-08 06:17 pm UTC

(no subject) -

parsimonia, 2009-11-08 06:21 pm UTC

(no subject) -

scottyquick, 2009-11-08 10:18 pm UTC

(no subject) -

parsimonia, 2009-11-08 10:29 pm UTC

(no subject) -

scottyquick, 2009-11-08 10:42 pm UTC

(no subject) -

parsimonia, 2009-11-08 10:44 pm UTC

(no subject) -

parsimonia, 2009-11-08 10:45 pm UTC

(no subject) -

scottyquick, 2009-11-08 10:46 pm UTC

(no subject) -

nevermore999, 2009-11-09 04:54 am UTC

(no subject) -

parsimonia, 2009-11-09 05:03 am UTC

(no subject) -

nevermore999, 2009-11-09 07:03 pm UTC

(no subject) -

parsimonia, 2009-11-09 07:28 pm UTC

(no subject) -

scottyquick, 2009-11-09 10:09 pm UTC

	Wait a minute. nefrekeptah 2009-11-08 09:25 am UTC (link)
	PAD didn't shut down SD; someone posted something - a twist ending or the like - that David specifically requested NOT be posted, he complianed to Livejournal, and Livejournal closed it down. He may have been partially responsible, but he didn't instigate it. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	Re: Wait a minute. okkult3000 2009-11-08 09:48 am UTC (link)
	He did instigate it, in that he started the chain of events that led to it. He instigated the process. Livejournal completed it. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Re: Wait a minute. -

shanejayell, 2009-11-08 10:18 am UTC

No, not really. -

nefrekeptah, 2009-11-08 07:35 pm UTC

(no subject) -

parsimonia, 2009-11-08 10:24 pm UTC

Mostly Agreed. -

nefrekeptah, 2009-11-11 01:15 am UTC

Re: Mostly Agreed. -

parsimonia, 2009-11-11 01:31 am UTC

Re: No, not really. -

angelophile, 2009-11-09 12:56 pm UTC

(no subject) -

nefrekeptah, 2009-11-11 03:37 am UTC

(no subject) -

angelophile, 2009-11-11 10:54 am UTC

	Re: Wait a minute. shanejayell 2009-11-08 10:18 am UTC (link)
	IMHO he did. He could have politely posted a request to take the pages down. Which I'm sure the mods would have. Instead, he decided to set in motion legal steps that killed the old SD. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Maybe he did. -

nefrekeptah, 2009-11-08 07:48 pm UTC

Re: Maybe he did. -

angelophile, 2009-11-10 10:07 am UTC

	Re: Wait a minute. arbre_rieur 2009-11-08 10:52 am UTC (link)
	I thought he reported it to Marvel, not Livejournal? And then Marvel contacted Livejournal? (Reply to this) (Parent)

	Re: Wait a minute. daningram 2009-11-08 05:49 pm UTC (link)
	Lets not forget that someone basically posted a full issue of Hercules the same day too. That sure as hell couldn't have helped. (Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Wait a minute.

parsimonia
2009-11-08 09:59 pm UTC (link)

LiveJournal closed it down, but him reporting it to Marvel's lawyers is what began the chain of events which led to LJ shutting it down. In all of this, he's the tattletale. (Well, technically whoever alerted PAD to the X-Factor scans might also qualify...I think I recall someone claiming that somebody from the SuperDickery forums was the one who alerted PAD to do original s_d post.)

When it comes down to it though, his expressed desire not to have his work scanned and posted here is why his work is banned on s_d. The the rules now explicitly state that if a creator doesn't want their work posted here, it will be removed.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Re: Wait a minute. -

gargoylekitty, 2009-11-09 12:00 am UTC

Re: Wait a minute. -

parsimonia, 2009-11-09 12:09 am UTC

Re: Wait a minute. -

galateus, 2009-11-09 12:41 am UTC

Re: Wait a minute. -

freddylloyd, 2009-11-09 03:48 am UTC

Re: Wait a minute. -

parsimonia, 2009-11-09 04:09 am UTC

Re: Wait a minute. -

freddylloyd, 2009-11-09 04:39 am UTC

Re: Wait a minute. -

parsimonia, 2009-11-09 05:02 am UTC

Re: Wait a minute. -

suzene, 2009-11-09 06:00 am UTC

Re: Wait a minute. -

angelophile, 2009-11-09 02:02 pm UTC

Re: Wait a minute. -

freddylloyd, 2009-11-09 04:37 pm UTC

Re: Wait a minute. -

angelophile, 2009-11-10 10:27 am UTC

Re: Wait a minute. -

freddylloyd, 2009-11-10 09:43 pm UTC

Re: Wait a minute. -

galateus, 2009-11-11 01:19 am UTC

Re: Wait a minute. -

freddylloyd, 2009-11-11 01:59 am UTC

Re: Wait a minute. -

galateus, 2009-11-11 02:31 am UTC

Re: Wait a minute. -

freddylloyd, 2009-11-11 03:20 am UTC

	jlbarnett 2009-11-08 02:03 pm UTC (link)
	I stopped earlier with his major plot twist in X-Factor. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	dorksidefiker 2009-11-08 03:37 pm UTC (link)
	I am not alone! Huzzah! (Reply to this) (Parent)

curlyjo1
2009-11-09 04:15 am UTC (link)

Same here. The issue of X-Factor that started the whole thing was the last one I bought. (I wasn't enjoying the story much anyway, but that was what really made me decide to drop it, instead of seeing if it got better.) I also haven't bought anything by him since.

The sad thing is, the whole to-do has colored my view of some of the older comics I have. I haven't been able to look at older X-Factor or Young Justice the same way.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	bluefall 2009-11-08 06:27 am UTC (link)
	Can't take credit, I lifted it from someone else around here, don't recall who. (Reply to this) (Parent)

suzene
2009-11-08 06:19 pm UTC (link)

It worked so well for him last time -- I hear X-Factor is selling three times what it was before he requested that people stop talking about his comics on the internet. Oh, wait...

80,84. X-FACTOR
09/06 X-Factor #11 - 43,431
09/07 X-Factor #23 - 53,311
=====
09/08 X-Factor #35 - 44,481 (-11.8%)
10/08 X-Factor #36 - 38,552 (-13.3%)
11/08 X-Factor #37 - 35,754 ( -7.3%)
12/08 X-Factor #38 - 34,425 ( -3.7%)
01/09 X-Factor #39 - 32,796 ( -4.7%)
02/09 X-Factor #40 - 31,943 ( -2.6%)
03/09 X-Factor #41 - 31,888 ( -0.2%)
04/09 X-Factor #42 - 32,000 ( +0.4%)
05/09 X-Factor #43 - 31,543 ( -1.4%)
06/09 X-Factor #44 - 31,552 ( +0.0%)
06/09 X-Factor #45 - 31,109 ( -1.4%)
07/09 X-Factor #46 - 31,213 ( +0.3%)
08/09 X-Factor #47 - 33,052 ( +5.9%)
09/09 X-Factor #48 - 30,305 ( -8.3%)
09/09 X-Factor #49 - 29,934 ( -1.2%)
6 mnth ( -6.1%)
1 year (-32.7%)
2 year (-43.9%)
3 year (-31.1%)

I'm not claiming that killing SD 1.0 is what dropped X-Factor's sales or anything -- this is actually a pretty slow bleed when compared to the way a lot of other books shed numbers, so the book was keeping a lot of the readers already invested -- but the strategy of secrecy didn't work to exempt the book from the general trend of diminishing readership, let alone boost the sales, and certainly not to the point where X-Factor would have been out-selling UXM or New Avengers.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	jlbarnett 2009-11-09 12:41 am UTC (link)
	frankly it was more likely the crappy plot turns it started taking than any word of mouth of anything like that. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	suzene 2009-11-09 12:53 am UTC (link)
	I'm sure lots of people who dropped the book had different reasons for doing so -- disliking the plot, issues with the creative team, cutting back on comics in general, etc. -- but my point was that the "no spoilers on the internet" push didn't do anything to increase the readership. (Reply to this) (Parent)

(Read comments) -