ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Forum Jump
Posts: 12440
Feb 18 10 12:45 AM
Golden Age
Moderatin' Mu - with all due respect, this is a subject that a number of us are fairly passionate about, so if there is something to hear, I for one would like to hear it. Or at least know when I might hear about it again, officially, from the powers that be bigger than me.
Posts: 146
Feb 18 10 1:21 AM
Posts: 2813
Feb 18 10 4:32 AM
From the context of the remaining posts, it's clear that fellow posters suggested that whatever the first post contained may have been a breach of privacy or professional decorum, and the original poster chose to delete it. Having seen the original post, I agree with his decision. It was posted in enthusiastic haste, and contained elements that were assumptions on his part, mixed in with e-mail snippets from a private conversation. Every time "Thor Omnibus" comes up on this board, various posters get whipped into a hopeful frenzy, and this thread is just another example of that -- a hopeful frenzy, with nothing official or unofficial to encourage it, save one poster's deleted assumptions.
Are you doing the Reader's Digest versions of your posts now? Thank You!!!I prefer it to the normal 20 pages of repetitious posts.
Feb 18 10 5:29 AM
Feb 18 10 5:36 AM
Posts: 147
Feb 18 10 10:05 AM
As the totally impartial, neutral, nonpartisan self-appointed authority in this election, I must inform you of the official recount so far:
5 votes for the only sensible, commonsensical option that anyone in his right mind would choose, ONE SINGLE MAGNIFICENT OMNIBUS, which is what Marvel's gonna do anyway, yadda yadda yadda.
5 votes for the preposterous idea of breaking the sacrosanct unity of this glorious run into 2 chunks.
Posts: 11529
Feb 18 10 10:45 AM
Click this link for the MASTERWORKS HOME PAGE, and don't miss out on the latest news and release information on the whole scene of collected editions at the CURRENT NEWS page!
Posts: 1497
Feb 18 10 10:51 AM
BTW, anyone interested in the mysterious first post of this thread can send me a private message or e-mail me atdoom4 (at) dbzmail.comand I'll give you the lowdown to the best of my recollection.
Posts: 3099
Feb 18 10 11:30 AM
Registered Member
XIII wrote: Are you really willing to pay 50% more and wait a long time when you can have the whole shebang in one single, cheaper, hefty tome? [/DEMAGOGUE MODE OFF]
Are you really willing to pay 50% more and wait a long time when you can have the whole shebang in one single, cheaper, hefty tome?
[/DEMAGOGUE MODE OFF]
Posts: 4384
Feb 18 10 11:49 AM
Sackman11 wrote: That being said, I'm a bit miffed about the mysterious disappearing content in the first post that started this party. It's like getting an invitation to see the missing Zapruder film footage, arriving at the theater, and having a group of conspiracy theorists tell you what they think would be on the missing film if it actually existed. . .didn't think that MM boards were monitored by the CIA.
Posts: 21978
Feb 18 10 11:58 AM
Forum Moderator
Feb 18 10 12:51 PM
Well, posting that an omnibus is on the way in the original post and then taking said post down seems a little rude.
Posts: 997
Feb 18 10 3:24 PM
Gormuu wrote: For the record, I don't know anything about a Thor by Simonson Omnibus, I didn't have anything to do with starting this thread or editing this thread. That said, with a Thor movie coming out next year, I would think we're going to see an onslaught of Thor books coming our way. It wouldn't surprise me if we see an Omnibus; who knows, maybe even two?
Posts: 623
Feb 18 10 6:18 PM
Feb 18 10 7:04 PM
Because the original poster DIDN'T KNOW that an Omnibus was on the way. He got an e-mail from someone that HE ASSUMED WAS IMPLYING that an Omnibus was on the way -- and then, based ONLY on that ASSUMPTION, he started this thread with its misleading subject line. Then he got chastised for assuming, and for posting portions of a private e-mail conversation (including the other party's contact info), and he deleted the post.
Posts: 1307
Feb 18 10 7:09 PM
Posts: 738
Feb 18 10 8:14 PM
jephyork wrote:Because the original poster DIDN'T KNOW that an Omnibus was on the way. He got an e-mail from someone that HE ASSUMED WAS IMPLYING that an Omnibus was on the way -- and then, based ONLY on that ASSUMPTION, he started this thread with its misleading subject line. Then he got chastised for assuming, and for posting portions of a private e-mail conversation (including the other party's contact info), and he deleted the post. Honestly, I wish he'd deleted the subject line too. Because every time "Thor Simonson Omnibus" gets mentioned on this board, everyone goes nuts. And starting a thread stating that the book "must" be on its way, just gets everyone all excited over nothing. Back on p.1-2 of this thread, everyone was reacting to the deletion of the original post by calming down, dropping the topic, laughing about the leak of imagined assumptions and moving on. I hoped it would go away. But no, it's caught fire once again, and the listmakers have come out of the woodwork, with their pages and pages of extras they want to see included, and the "how should we package this" people have shown up to talk about one volume vs. two, and now everyone's all hopped up for a Thor Omnibus. And -- oh great -- now the "how dare you censor valuable information, we demand full disclosure" people have arrived -- people who are accusing the board mods of taking the post down, even though the post clearly shows that the *original poster* was the one who edited it. Oy vey. And this entire thing is based on one poster's leap to a conclusion that wasn't warranted by the facts, and his unfounded statement that an Omnibus "must" be on the way. Let's put it this way, DC Newton -- if you accidentally started a rumor, even though you weren't sure if the rumor was true or not -- would you stand by the contents of the rumor and watch as everyone else gets all worked up and excited? Well. Of course YOU would. But the rest of you get the idea. -Jeph!
Feb 18 10 9:14 PM
This is what I meant by rudeness.
Feb 18 10 9:46 PM
jephyork wrote:This is what I meant by rudeness. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. -Jeph!
Share This