I don’t [buy] the whole “but they’re her friends!” argument. They were all beating the crap out of each other in Civil War.
–Apodaca

No, what’s funny is how way-too-seriously you’re taking this discussion.

Then again, I have a tendency to find comedy in tragedy.
–Apodaca

If the person asking for an account of real-life hypocrisy is taking it too seriously — what does that make the people (you) asking for an account of the hypocrisy of fictional characters?
--Mike

It makes us people who criticize the writing in superhero comics, as opposed to someone who gets into fights with people about their criticism of superhero comics.

Do you see yet?
–Apodaca

Thank you for not denying I'm addressing a hypocrisy. It's a wonder you feel the need to challenge anything I say.

As such, the question doesn't seem to be whether I see, but whether you do.

No, Writer B did something more severe in the extreme 24 years ago, and you can settle this either by agreeing with my plain observation and being consistent with your criticism, or explaining how my observation is wrong. You get my point plenty, and by the standards of debate as its known in western civilization, my point holds plenty of weight until you invalidate it.

It’s funny how the hypocrisy of a fictional character is severe enough to hold against the writer, but your hypocrisy doesn’t count as hypocrisy at all based on your arbitrary denial.
--Mike

I was really hoping it wasn’t “Writer A did that? Well, Writer B did something similar (or, if you prefer, something worse) 28 years ago, so THERE!”

Oh well.

Que sera, sera!
--Brian

By the standards of debate as it's known to western civilization, your need to invalidate my observation ("I was really hoping it wasn't...") isn't evidence my simple observation of events as they're archived in this thread is invalid. As with Apodaca, it's a wonder you feel the need to challenge anything I say.

Oh well.

Que sera, sera!

Do you see yet?

I don’t [buy] the whole “but they’re her friends!” argument. They were all beating the crap out of each other in Civil War.
--Apodaca

Is there anyone POed at this who wasn’t POed at Frank Miller’s run on Daredevil? How does your outrage over a female superhero demonstrating the flaw of a discretionary hypocrisy compare to your outrage over, say, a male superhero sabotaging his girlfriend’s career to coerce her into marrying him or beating on a guy he owed $10 to? What am I missing?
--Mike

Suffice to say, I don’t get your point in the least bit, but I certainly hope it is not something along the lines of “Writer A did that? Well, Writer B did something similar 28 years ago, so THERR!,” as that really doesn’t hold much weight.
--Brian

No, Writer B did something more severe in the extreme 24 years ago, and you can settle this either by agreeing with my plain observation and being consistent with your criticism, or explaining how my observation is wrong. You get my point plenty, and by the standards of debate as its known in western civilization, my point holds plenty of weight until you invalidate it.

It’s funny how the hypocrisy of a fictional character is severe enough to hold against the writer, but your hypocrisy doesn’t count as hypocrisy at all based on your arbitrary denial.
--Mike

No, what’s funny is how way-too-seriously you’re taking this discussion.

Then again, I have a tendency to find comedy in tragedy.
--Apodaca

If the person asking for an account of real-life hypocrisy is taking it too seriously -- what does that make the people (you) asking for an account of the hypocrisy of fictional characters?

Everyone should write this down and look at it once a day. "

And then shake their head sadly.

It’s funny how the hypocrisy of a fictional character is severe enough to hold against the writer, but your hypocrisy doesn’t count as hypocrisy at all based on your arbitrary denial.

No, what's funny is how way-too-seriously you're taking this discussion.

Then again, I have a tendency to find comedy in tragedy.

And that might be a plot point building underneath things, where the folks letting the "underground" heroes get off could see consequences in the future.

Or else they're all Skrulls.

Everyone should write this down and look at it once a day.

Is there anyone POed at this who wasn’t POed at Frank Miller’s run on Daredevil? How does your outrage over a female superhero demonstrating the flaw of a discretionary hypocrisy compare to your outrage over, say, a male superhero sabotaging his girlfriend’s career to coerce her into marrying him or beating on a guy he owed $10 to? What am I missing?

Such a juicy set-up, and I couldn’t bring myself to respond with any number of bon mots.

Disagreements aren't settled by the need of one person to insult the other, except in a pack-mentality.

Suffice to say, I don’t get your point in the least bit, but I certainly hope it is not something along the lines of “Writer A did that? Well, Writer B did something similar 28 years ago, so THERR!,” as that really doesn’t hold much weight.

No, Writer B did something more severe in the extreme 24 years ago, and you can settle this either by agreeing with my plain observation and being consistent with your criticism, or explaining how my observation is wrong. You get my point plenty, and by the standards of debate as its known in western civilization, my point holds plenty of weight until you invalidate it.

It's funny how the hypocrisy of a fictional character is severe enough to hold against the writer, but your hypocrisy doesn't count as hypocrisy at all based on your arbitrary denial.

Doesn't seem like it made a whole lot of difference to anyone who did. Or would they now need some sort of amnesty to register?

It will be interesting to see in future issues whether or not he addresses the FF's role in the Civil War or whether he moves on to other plots and story arcs.

Emoticon!

Sorry for the typo - it's the end of a very long day.

All of which brings me to another point. I find it very interesting that Mark Millar wrote Civil War and presumably came up with the main concepts, conflicts, and ramifications. And yet until this month, he has not had to work in the post-Civil War Universe. Now, I have not read FF 554, but I am curious, did he reference the Initiative or Civil War in it? On the surface, it seems to me that Millar was the chief architect of the Civil War, but has not had to actually deal with the ramifications of it. Now it is up to the other writers to sort it out and we are seeing across the board the inconsistencies in their respective interpretations and, possibly or potentially, their frustrations at the restrictions of Marvel's new status quo.

Since when does S.H.I.E.L.D. have limited resources and manpower?

Particularly because, in the first instance, the New Avengers had just finished a brutal battle and were surrounded by a whole pile of SHIELD agents plus the Mighty Avengers (or was it just Carol and a whole pile of SHIELD agents? Someone help me out there - either way, it was not a matter of limited manpower that led to the Avengers getting free).

And in the second instance, it was Luke Cage alone surrounded by the Mighty Avengers.

Any cop will tell you that with limited resources and manpower, you pick your shots.

Since when does S.H.I.E.L.D. have limited resources and manpower?

No more registration problems. No more Spider-Man unmasked problems.

Is there anyone POed at this who wasn’t POed at Frank Miller’s run on Daredevil? How does your outrage over a female superhero demonstrating the flaw of a discretionary hypocrisy compare to your outrage over, say, a male superhero sabotaging his girlfriend’s career to coerce her into marrying him or beating on a guy he owed $10 to? What am I missing?

Such a juicy set-up, and I couldn't bring myself to respond with any number of bon mots.

Suffice to say, I don't get your point in the least bit, but I certainly hope it is not something along the lines of "Writer A did that? Well, Writer B did something similar 28 years ago, so THERR!," as that really doesn't hold much weight.