to be fair to all involved in the 'fracas-which-wasn't-an-actual-fracas' on the page-previous....
well this is cool. from what Spike said above, he and I can state whatever philosophy we like with out directly or indirectly (passive aggressive style) taking a gutless sideswipe at each other employing slogans versus making a point, and not pretending that sloganeering is ‘a point’, from either the ‘left’ or the ‘right’ political perspective. Good for the goose, good for the gander. We BOTH ‘drop the bullpuckey’ without either of us making excuses to ‘game the system’ to abuse the letter of the law, in order to prison rape the spirit of the law, which is a destination I’m sure Slam Bradley is very conversant with.
I will happily eschew using ‘sjw’, and in turn, Spike will forgo posting a drive-by side-swipe. since that’s ‘fair and equal’ and what political correctness set out to achieve.
It will also allow us to discuss what we mutually agree with and want, in society and in comics (since comics reflect society, and in their best form, help to improve it).
And if Spike and Slam were amenable, we could chose to share, without rancour or passive aggressive ‘tit-for-tat’, as sadly been the case on twitter, our personally ascribed and adhered-to desired societal ‘end-game’, our desired ‘utopias’ , as expressed in comics, to help those utopias happen.
Meaning the ‘world’ we would like to see develop, live within, have our families enjoy, and be expressed within the ‘vote with your dollars’ comic-book world. Whether in California, New York, Sante Fe, Atlanta, Brunswick, Fitzroy, Collaroy, Parramatta, Bondi, Quebec, Ontario, Toronto, Whistler Mountain, or even the Geordie territories in the UK. Places where folks had ’skin in the game’ and suffered actual risks for their beliefs (vs faux-progressive tweets/youtube-clips, etc.).
unlike Berkely and SantaCruz, these days.
as in ‘being at risk for what you espouse, e.g. ‘having some skin in the game.’ or, if we might employ 'legal-speak', as Slam is an attorney, we might ask “do you have a bull which might be gored?’, as ‘Whose bull is gored’ is a fave legal phrase in the contexts of any perceived fracas betwixt you, Slam and I. and often a phrase used (and abused) in all discussions pertaining to the Humanities.
Every message I’ve received from a mod here backs this up. And they are VERY generous in allowing us to ‘get a bit salty’, then trust fine minds like you, Spike, and Slam, to maybe, hopefully, find a common ground between us all.
Let’s have fun with each other and help the people we want to help and express how much we agree, versus disagree, as per the ‘bones’ of it all, versus merely the ‘skin of it’.
You, Spike, and Slam, ask me any question you like regarding ‘what world I’d like to see happen’. I’m sure you’ll be pleased with the answers. maybe surprised
(Unless bad drawing comes into it, lol. )
which Dave Sim can never be accused of, at least when inked by Gerhard. But this leads me to ask why Spike, who’s sociology seems adverse or opposite to Sim’s, chooses, for an avi, an image which *is* Sim’s. And basically 'attainment based' and skill-based. Which, and I hope Slam appreciates this, is like being a lawyer: a position based upon skill and (hopefully) talent.
surprises are at least 50% of the JOY of any comics-reading experience, so, I truly hope he and Slam appreciate that.
Let’s make a positive non partisan difference in the politics or sociology thread with this, please.