DB,
Not only are you mean-spirited, you are also cowardly. I will here quite
deliberately violate every rule of the forum to expose your sorry ass for
what you are. You sent me this stuff and then blocked any replies I might
make, hoping to avoid the consequences. Well, guess what! You have just
pulled the chain on the wrong SON-OF-A-BITCH.
Mr. Kleppe, do you duty. Strike my name from your list of legal
participants. I have no intentions of associating myself people like this
sorry little fuck.
Regards,
Don Granberry.
------ Forwarded Message
From: Mail Delivery System <Mailer-Daemon@pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 11:47:13 -0700
To: noharness@mac.com
Subject: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender
This message was created automatically by mail delivery software (Exim).
A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed:
sommer@3rdm.net
SMTP error from remote mailer after end of data:
host mail.3rdm.net [12.169.112.90]: 554 Message rejected because of
content
------ This is a copy of the message, including all the headers. ------
Return-path: <noharness@mac.com>
Received: from dialup-67.74.176.74.dial1.houston1.level3.net
([67.74.176.74])
by pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1)
id 1A6aNx-0000hJ-00
for sommer@3rdm.net; Mon, 06 Oct 2003 11:47:09 -0700
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.1.1.2418
Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 13:48:32 -0500
Subject: Re: [FFML] Re: C&C? What a joke! Re: [Ranma] The Amazon
Queen,part one (draft)
From: Donald Lee Granberry <noharness@mac.com>
To: DB Sommer <sommer@3rdm.net>
Message-ID: <BBA72330.F8BA%noharness@mac.com>
In-Reply-To: <008601c38c2b$80006de0$cdabfea9@sommer>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
And to your second commentary:
David,
It is not what you wrote alone, that bothered me.
What he wrote shouldn't bother you at all. David gave his reasons for his
reactions and why. The only reason it should 'bother' you is if you were
offended by it. Since nothing in it was inflammatory, I can only assume what
bothered you was that it wasn't mindless praise, and actually critically
assessed the fic, and disapproved of several things.
I never said that what David wrote bothered, me other than the fact that I
disagreed with it. I don't think it was all that important a matter to be
concerned with in a comic piece either. This is light fiction, not theology.
Several other folks have
offered criticism and commentary that seemed a good deal less than useful,
given that Robert usually writes comedy and is, in _Queen of the Amazons_
again offering all of us another excellent round of laughter, okay? Were
he
writing a serious piece, where these kinds of things actually matter a
great
deal, I would not find it so annoying.
'Comedy' is not an excuse for doing whatever you want, however you want, and
ignoring everything other than grammar corrections. This is a story, not a
stand up comedy act. Unless you feel there's no room in comedy for
characterization, plot, internal consitansy, or any of the other tools
necessary for storytelling.
Of all the points you mention, internal consistency and characterization are
the truly important ones. There were a host of other problems with Robert's
work that were left unexamined because of this fixation some people have
with their foolish theology.
I am put in mind of what happened to Susan Doenime. She was writing stuff
funny enough to rival Robert's work, but after she got plastered on FFML
over trivial crap that did not matter in a comedic piece, she all but
stopped writing.
Good. She shouldn't be posting it publically if she can't handle negative
criticism. (And it if it was truly 'trivial crap' then why did it bother her
so much she
stopped writing it? It was trivial crap.) A writer has to be able to sort
out the useful from the useless. Not everyone is going to like what you
write. That's the truth, and it includes Kenko, which really seems to anger
you. Sorry, you're going to have to deal with it. There is no such things as
universal praise or a universally liked work.
I don't expect such a thing, and you are putting words in my mouth. Read the
C&C I have handed out to writers on this forum and you will have direct
evidence of your false accusations, DB. There is a great difference to be
had in useful C&C and meanness for the sake of being mean. Crushing people,
or discouraging them at every opportunity is counterproductive in the
extreme.
In fact, the piece she was working on at the time turned
rather dark before petering out altogether.
Perhaps it was always meant to be that way as well. I don't know personally,
but it sounds like you're making an assumption based on weak evidence. Now,
perhaps you talked with her and she told you it took a dark turn because of
the negative criticism, and if she did, or said such publically, then I
concede your point. Otherwise don't make assumptions about other people's
works.
Were it just one piece of fiction by one author, you might have a case, DB.
OTOH, I have been a participant here for more than a little while and a
pattern has emerged. True, there are a host of reasons why an author might
quit writing, but among the primary reasons in many cases around here is
getting a rhetorical beating that serves no discernable purpose everytime
you post something.
You guys are welcome to pick on me,
Ah, so anyone that dares disagree with you is 'picking on' you? My, aren't
we draped in a cloak of righteousness? Or is it pretentiousness?
Nope. I can handle anything you dish out. Rest assured however, if you send
me something stupid, or mean-spirited, and you have more than once, I will
simply give you the treatment you desverve. Unfortunately, a great many
authors are not a mean son-of-a-bitch like I am. You, on the other hand,
take great joy in inflicting on the defenseless. You've shown me that
streak more than once. So, you can expect to get flamed if you step over the
line and if you complain to me about it, you can expect to get flamed again.
Understand? I don't like your habits. I don't like the things you say to
people and I will call you on it when and as I see fit.
just be advised that I am not the least
bit shy about shooting back and that I do NOT suffer fools gladly.
And yet you manage to live with yourself. How do you do it?
The irony in this statement is so thick, I'm choking on it.
Oh, ha-ha! Come on, DB. Surely you can do better than this.
ON THE OTHER HAND, UPON ATTEMPTING TO SEND YOU THIS REPLY, I HAVE ALSO
DISCOVERED YOU TO BE A FUCKING COWARD. YOU LIKE TO DISH IT OUT BUT YOU
CANNOT TAKE IT, CAN YOU, DB?
Now then, folks, let's all do ourselves a favor and put our thinking caps
on
before undertaking to do C&C, okay?
I did so, and I imagine most of the other people that dared to say something
other than, "This is so brilliant, I'm ROTFLMAO", did so as well That you
implied those that dared say anything critical are not thinking is a gross
insult. In my opinion, you owe them a public apology for this stunt.
Show me where I said any such thing, DB. Show me! You are putting words into
my mouth. You make it clear that you have not been reading the C&C I have
offered other writers and I know for a fact that you haven't seen the C&C I
sent Robert. You have your head so far up your ass I wonder how it is that
you can breath, let alone see to type.
The type of the piece counts for a great
deal when you start worrying about minor details, such as whether or not
a
.45 calibre round will break up green concrete or whether there were
shoulder-fired anti-aircaft missiles available in Vietnam prior 1979 or
any
other such crap, okay?
Your comparison is, quite frankly, stupid. Internal consitancy is being
argued about, not what type of blow Ranma used when he struck Cologne. Even
in humor, you need that to make the fic work.
To judge internal consistency, the story itself must be the standard, not
the engineering standards. I am well acquainted with both because I have
been in construction most of my life and am transitioning into writing as a
second career. Don't play games with me, DB. You are an idiot and I am here
proving it.
It make damned little difference to a comedy piece.
What, reasonable questions, which many people seconded, about behaviors that
don't make sense even with the type of humor Kenko is using, make little
difference? Evidently not to some of the people that read it, since it
struck them as off when other things didn't. Thanks for telling everyone
their concerns are meaningless and that they must be stupid for questioning
anything in the fic as not being brilliant.
Well, if the shoe fits, heel-fly, you are more than welcome to wear it! If
you are going to do C&C, then you should do C&C and not take these silly
fucking little half-steps or resorting to outright insults and calling it
C&C just to stroke your own ego. Got that everybody? C&C has an express
purpose. It is NOT criticism solely for the sake of criticism. It is not
meanness just to be mean. The purpose of C&C is to help an author improve
his work. If that is not your reason for doing C&C, you are an idiot, an
asshole or a whole lot of both!
If Robert wants Akane to think of Ranma as a pervert, there is enough
support in the canon for him to do so and that's the end of it
"I have spoken. None my refute my judgement."
Sorry, Donny, but it's not the end of it because of your sayso. This is not
'canon'. This is an alt-uni, and Kenko has changed many things from the
'canon' which means you can't fall back on that as excuse for everything.
Having people act like nothing's been changed from the canon, when it has
been and there is no justification in their behavior, is poor writing.
So? If it is a Ranma1/2 story and the characters are anything like the
characters in the canon, then the reader has every reason to expect them to
behave as they do in the original story. Otherwise, it is not a Ranma1/2
story, is it? You should give up sophistry, DB. You aren't very good at it.
And here's the scary part, guess what? He can revise things if there are
inconsitancies in it. *gasp* Some people do such things when others point
out
possibly flaws in work. Not 'you should ignore anything that strikes you as
being wrong because it's comedy. Laugh with me. HAHAHA."
You know who actually did a decent bit of C&C on this piece and they did it
only _after_ I bitched Brian out? Phil Bloom. It was unkind and rough as
hell, unnecessarily so, but you know what? It was genuine C&C! Go read it.
You might accidentally learn something, but I doubt it. You have already
proven beyond shadow of a doubt that you use some part of your anatomy other
than your brain to think with.
.. If Robert
wants Ranma and Akane to end up married, that was Takahashi's intent to
begin with.
That has nothing to do with what he's writing, since this is an alt-uni.
What he's doing now is a sufficient divergence that he can't have the
chracters act like they're still in the 'canon' universe, when different
things happen to them. Sure, he can still have Ranma and Akane together, but
since he's already altered their dynamics, having them act like they weren't
altered feels off, which is what people have been saying.
So why should Ranma & Akane match up be the deciding factor insofar as the
quality, let alone the viabilityh of the piece is concerned? If Brian was
not interested in working with someone on such a piece, then he should not
have made the goddamned post! All he did was hurt and hinder. He did nothing
to help Robert improve his work. If the intent here is not help authors, why
should any self-respecting author bother to post here?
Having said that, for all we know, Robert will have Ranma
married off to the entire bunch. He has not written enough of the story
for
anyone to know.
But there is more than enough circumstantial evidence to point to it being
R+A. He's
being very hamhanded about it, in fact. His previous writings are another
clue to what he has planned since he tends to do the same thing over and
over. Oh, sure, right before he does the climax, he
can have the Evaegelion Universe intrude and turn everyone into Tang and no
one ends up with anyone, but
that's not real likely. No, he's laid extensive groundwork in the first
chapter to point in a certain direction, and since this is comedy, it's
unlikely he's going for that sort of change, else he would be going about
things differently. If he was going for a harem type thing, is he going to
have Cologne arbitrarily decide that Nabiki and Kasumi are wrong because of
their hairstyles and make Akane Ranma's fiancee? Hardly. he'd have the girls
contending for his hand, or some other such thing that would have comedic
potential.
Frankly, this and your original complaint are nothing more than whining that
there are people that dared not give Kenko's latest praise, and it offended
you. You're chastising others for daring to question Kenko's brilliance and
implying there might be problems with the fic. And you're incredibly
arrogant in your high-handed, holier-than-thou attitude in going about it.
Congatualtions, you've completely failed in your intent and managed to
offend people, rather than making them seeing the 'error of their ways.'
DB, you are so inexcusably full of shit. It is hard to believe and you are,
once again, accusing me falsely. You do this kind silly,
ill-considered kind of thing all the time. Unfortunately, there is more than
one person like you that participates in FFML. It's a real shame, because if
you and a few others would be just a wee bit more sensible, and learn some
manners, FFML would be a really good place for new authors to improve their
skills. The problem is, you have discovered that you can indulge in your
mean streak with some measure of impunity. I don't have to put up with your
sorry fucking ass and I am not going to.
Sayonara, Asshole.
------ End of Forwarded Message
.---Anime/Manga Fanfiction Mailing List----.
| Administrators - ffml-admins@anifics.com |
| Unsubscribing - ffml-request@anifics.com |
| Put 'unsubscribe' in the subject |
`---- http://ffml.anifics.com/faq.txt -----'