Will we ever get the official scoop on who VIP was/were?

[Elveen]

I'll PM you my bill...

But, but... you're already Bill.....???





-slym

Maybe he is actually a William?

[ZephyrWasHOT!!]

That's fine....but you're wrong. The Leaf's statement was dead spot on, and couched in a humorous observance to drive the point home.

Again the best we can expect here is to agree to disagree

That's fine. There are certainly people who think the world is a flat disc around which the sun, moon, and stars rotate. I don't agree with them, either.

[geomancer]The question here was will we ever get an official response - for the record, now that that VEI has gotten over the legal hurdle. There have certainly been discussions of it, and well constructed ones ]

No. You've already been told that, several times, by several members. Clearly, you have little or no experience with Non-Disclosure Agreements. A Non-Disclosure Agreement means NO ONE CAN SAY ANYTHING, under penalty of litigation.

If you have such discomfort with the continuation of this discussion, why are you still in it?

You're projecting. I never said, nor implied, nor intimated in any way, shape, or form that I had "discomfort" with the continuation of this discussion, or any discussion.

Frankly, you'll find, I'll out discuss anyone on just about anything.

So, that should answer your question of "why are you still in it?"

Clearly fellow members do not feel this way or share this view so why try to interfere wit its continuation?

You're going to have to be specific, here. Which members? And "which way"? Which "view" is not shared?

If you mean that the obviousness of VIP being DF, as The Leaf and many others have said, despite the fact that there's no official word because of NDAs, then you're going to have to point me to where

As far as "interferring", cleary you have not bothered to read a word I typed. No one can "interfere" with any topic here. It's impossible for a regular member to "interfere" in ANY discussion.

If you don't like the contribution of a certain member, instead of complaining about it, as you are doing here, and falsely accusing people of "interferring", allow me to introduce you to the "ignore" feature on this message board:

1. From anywhere on the board, click the "Friends & Foes" link at the top of the page.

2. Click the "ignoring" button.

3. Scroll to the bottom of that page, where is asks "Add a user to this list?"

4. Enter the user's name that you wish to ignore. In this case, I am "ZephyrWasHot!!", two (2) exclamation points.

5. Click the "add user" button.

Your ignore function has now been set, and you no longer have to see anyone's contributions that bother or upset you in any way.

I am familiar with NDAs having signed them and had people sign them over the years – so that is an incorrect assumption on your part

No, given the information, and the fact that you called common NDA language "childish" tells me you're really not that familiar with them.

So, it was an accurate assumption on my part.

Now you're trying to ask the same question, over and over, hoping for a different response.....?

No I was re-iterating the question to get the thread back on track.

The thread has "been on track" the entire time.

Had you simply ignored The Leaf's statement, and my compliment of said statement, instead of making a federal case out of it, NOTHING WOULD HAVE COME OF IT, and the thread would have continued as it has, only without these periodic "interferrances."

Allow me to repeat, in case you missed it: had you simply ignored The Leaf's comment, and my compliment of that comment, none of this interaction between us would have occured.

In other words: YOU, by wildly overreacting, created this whole tête - à - tête we now have going on.

See how that works?

What is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting the outcome to be different the definition of.........?

Since that is a good description of yourself, you need to ask yourself that question about your own actions.

we're engaging in pointless rhetoric, now.

I agree.

Good. We agree on something.

You got the answer. The answer is this: VEI cannot comment. However, those "in the know" have stated, OFF THE RECORD, that VIP was, in fact, DF. No one will confirm or deny this publicly.

I certainly don't know for sure, and if I did, I wouldn't tell you.

It's entirely up to you whether you believe that or not, but you're certainly never going to get a better, clearer answer from VEI OR VIP, unless you get it "off the record" from someone in either camp.

Clearly there has already been some response since the question was asked. So it was worth asking and judging by participation, appreciated. I disagree with what you say here in that further discussion through other channels, as Brain Cronin could potentially be offering, may open doors to further insight or confirmation.

What you're doing is to get someone to violate an NDA. You want "official" word. The only way you are going to get "official" word is if someone violates an NDA.

There is an OUTSIDE....very SLIM....chance that SOMEONE who is not party to the NDA coud tell you "for sure" who VIP was....but that would not be OFFICIAL (since you're parsing, let's parse all the way), since the OFFICIAL parties involved are under an NDA, and, of course, those parties would now DENY this information, since it is now part of an NDA.

See how that works?

This topic is not new to this board, and it is, of course, of great interest to many members, including myself. Why you felt the need to re-state that, I'm not quite sure.

Again....you clearly have little or no experience with NDAs. If I knew anything, which I do not officially, I couldn't tell you EITHER WAY, even if I knew officially (<---see the paradox that NDAs make?) I would have to TELL you I didn't know, even if I did (meaning, I would have to lie.)

Again, you are mistaken.

As I said before, the fact that you called common NDA language "childish" means you do not.

As for your earlier response there was no mention of NDAs, only “if I knew I wouldn’t tell you.”

Does everything have to be explicitly stated many times in many places or it's not valid in ALL cases? Did I HAVE to spell OUT that I was explicitly referring to an NDA before you understood that?

In other words, do we constantly have to reinvent the wheel every time we have a discussion?

If you were not aware that there was an NDA involved, despite the fact that it was beyond obvious in the MANY threads we've had about this very topic, as well as the MANY posts in THIS thread, I apologize, and state now for your benefit: there's an NDA involved.

Fair enough?

So I stand by my response. This side issue on NDAs is a simple misunderstanding or willful misdirection.

No, it's a simple misunderstanding by yourself, or a willful misdirection because you didn't understand it until it was spelled out for you.

The NDA is not a "side" issue. It's the MAIN issue. It is specifically BECAUSE there's an NDA (which is STANDARD in cases like these) that you will not hear an "official response" on who VIP is/was.

What a bizarre statement!

As far as your comment regarding what I do and do not appreciate, THAT was rather petulant of you. In one paragraph, you state you "don't know what you are used to in here", but in another, you feel confident enough to be able to state what you think I "seem" to appreciate.....?

NICE!

This is something we are both guilty of. There is no moral high ground here.

Yeah, we're going to have to agree to disagree on that one.....

No one here is trolling or "post padding." I would suggest, when you BELIEVE you see them, instead of making a federal case out of nothing, you refrain from "pointing them out for what they are."

Trolling as I see it includes entering into a thread and disparaging the thread itself

You are laboring under the impression that anyone has disparaged this thread.

Please point out to me, in these two posts, where the "disparagement" is:

This thread is like someone finding out that an iceberg sunk the Titanic.

The Leaf cracks me up. He's been a member for 3 years, only has 115 posts.....but every now and again, he busts out with these well timed, pithy posts.....nice.

Did you think The Leaf was personally disparaging YOU with that comment? I suppose you must, given your (over)reaction. Did you think The Lead was disparaging this thread? Again, I suppose you must.

Apparently, you don't really understand what "disparagement" is. The Leaf was simply pointing out the obvious.

If you're going to choose to be offended by innocuous statements like this, you're not going to do well in social situations. I suggest you develop a MUCH, MUCH thicker skin before trying.

I understand that you are looking for "official" word. You're not going to get it. If you DO, you're very, very lucky, and very, very persistent, and very, very connected, and will possibly get some people into a lot of trouble.

As for UNofficially, The Leaf is 100% correct. We all "know" that VIP is DF. Can it be proven? No. Will it be official? No.

But do we "know" (wink, wink, nudge, nudge)....? Of course.

or trying to re-direct it into an unrelated tangential direction.

I'm sorry, have you ever READ anything on this board? No one TRIES to re-direct ANY thread into an unrelated tangential direction...at least, not purposely, or maliciously. It simply HAPPENS.

Have YOU ever hung out in a social situation, and forced people to stay on a particular topic until YOU were satisfied with said topic...?

You know, I'll bet you have.

Again....if this is an issue with you, I would like to point out the "ignore" feature once more.

The post padding was an assumption on my part, and I retract it.

You might have noticed, I don't really....*need*...to post pad. Retraction appreciated.

I don't know what you are used to in here.

By that I was questioning whether you are used to people deferring to you or humoring you.

Again....allow me to introduce you to this board. Not only am I NOT used to people DEFERRING to me, but quite the contrary. I expect...no, DEMAND...that if something I say is wrong, or simply not agreed with...that I am challenged on it.

Allow me to share a short story with you: Saturday night, I was out with some friends. One of them expressed the desire to have lived in Los Angeles in the 1960s, where, among other things, he expressed the idea that "the air was cleaner."

I looked at him in shock. "Are you serious?" I asked. "Do you have ANY idea how filthy and dirty the air in LA was in the 60's and 70's? Are you aware that it's FAR cleaner TODAY, because of EPA and CA State regulations, which essentially chased the gross polluters (major industry) out of SoCal?"

"Um. No." he said.

"Well, you know, you really should find out before spreading disinformation like that as fact. You were completely wrong, and if I, or someone else who was aware of the facts, weren't around to challenge you, how many people would have believed you?"

I'm sure Jedi, Myron, Woog, Hobo, and Depluto all got a laugh when they read that you think I am used to people "deferring" to me, as if I hold some high position of esteem around here.

Again, nothing could be further from the truth.

I think you can already tell that I am not going to be deferring to you, and what respect you get from me will have to be earned through substantive comments about Valiant comics.

And as I think YOU can already tell, I TRULY don't care what your opinion of me is. I say what I have to say, and I expect others to say what they have to say. If they like what I have to say, great. If they challenge what I have to say, they better be prepared to back it up. If they don't like what I have to say, ignore me.

Whether or not I earn your respect through "substantive comments about Valiant comics" (despite my volumes of substantive comments about Valiant comics, and my own ongoing personal involvement in the advancement of Valiant comics to the masses) means absolutely nothing to me. I am not here to earn anyone's respect. If I do, bonus. If I don't, it matters nothing.

If you have gotten the mistaken impression that I expect ANYONE to "defer" to me (you seem to be confusing my responses with Cin's), then allow me to disabuse you of THAT notion right now.

I have said what I believe regarding "elite" status on these boards, and don't care to go into them at this time. There are plenty of posts on that matter; a bit of research on them will lead you to them, if you are interested. Suffice it to say, every poster on this board is equal to every other poster, and lives or dies by the merits of their posts...and nothing else, not post count, not pecking order, not social status....changes that.

The humoring part depends on how things go from here.

Again...I don't believe it is physically possible for me to care any less what you think of me than I do right now.

Then, my friend, I would suggest you take some time and LEARN what "we" are used to, in here. .

My friend I have. I have browsed often before I joined and since. I have already addressed this in an earlier post.

Clearly, you have not. CLEARLY! You completely and wildly overreact to a couple of throwaway sentences, and then go on and on about "respect" and "mocking" and "derailing threads"....and you expect anyone to believe you have ANY understanding of how things operate around here....?

Let me give you a quick primer: this board has a DISTINCTIVE fraternal and convivial atmosphere, an atmosphere carefully cultivated by the board's owner, and now its moderators. 999 times out of 1,000, if a comment can be considered two possible ways, jovially or confrontationally, it will have been intended jovially. It is a nice environment and has led to a solid regular membership, MANY of whom have stated, at many times, that THIS is the only board they post on with any regularity precisely BECAUSE of this fraternal atmosphere. .

Those who don't care about the reactions and concerns of the people on this board quickly find themselves no longer part of this board, either voluntarily or forcefully. This is not a threat, but an observation of fact. Those who "don't care" cannot possibly integrate themselves successfully. .

Fraternal and convivial is a mutual thing. Not all threads have to hit the same repetitive note, do they?

That depends entirely on the whim of the poster, doesn't it?

Who are you to decide what threads hit what notes? Who am I? Answer to both questions: no one.

If you have a problem with the way an individual posts, ignore them. If you have a problem with the way the board AS A WHOLE posts....you may as well be complaining to a brick wall.

Having every thread devolve into some tangent is not fraternal but self indulgent.

In your entirely uninformed opinion. Nearly every regular poster here would disagree.

I will not go into the psychology behind this, because this post is already long enough.

This compulsion to cause every thread to degenerate and require people to put up with it or leave has nothing to do with Valiant comics.

I'm sorry, I guess you missed the point where I said that no one was REQURED to put up with anything.

I'll say it once more: if you don't like the way an individual posts, ignore them. If you don't like the fact that threads get derailed due ENTIRELY to human nature, then you can raise a big fuss, like you're doing now, and perhaps that may work once or twice, but you're eventually going to be marginalized and no one will listen to ANYTHING you say.

At best it’s a forced joviality that only extends brotherhood to that fraction of valiant fans or potential valiant fans with a particular eccentric taste of humor, and a distinct intolerance for dissent.

Again....that is ENTIRELY in your COMPLETELY uninformed opinion.

The only intolerance I see ANYWHERE in this thread is YOURS, for railing about throwaway, innocuous posts. This board THRIVES on dissent.

If you imagine any of the joviality around here is FORCED, or done with an AGENDA....you are QUITE sadly mistaken.

I do regret having said ‘I don’t care.’

You should, as should everyone on the internet, expect everything to be challenged...and rightfully so. If an opinion is not worth fighting for (and I don't mean aggressively, I mean vigorously), then it is not worth having at all.

One more time: if you don't understand the environment here, or are OPPOSED to it, you are going to be fighting an uphill battle by taking things seriously that were not meant to be taken so at any time. You cannot change it without changing the foundation of the board, because this board's atmosphere is as much an expression of the owner's personality and philosophies as it is fraternal, so it would be fruitless to even try.

TRUST ME, I know this from PERSONAL EXPERIENCE. .

I am not at all concerned with an uphill battle. But its my belief as someone who has been around for a while, that I am not just speaking for myself here, otherwise I would not have done so.

So, you believe there are others who will complain so bitterly about the fact that, because there's really nothing "new" to talk about with Valiant, that threads specifically ABOUT Valiant are consistently and systematically derailed by people with a malicious agenda?

And do you believe that there are others who are so completely intolerant that a couple of innocuous and on-topic posts throws them completely over the edge?

Do you believe that....?

Is drowning out those with different preferences a genuine source of pride for you?

Allow me to introduce you to a topic that I must repeat often, because it is often ignored by those....such as yourself....who wish to deny this reality when they feel that they don't have a solid argument to stand on, so they need a crutch:

No one here can be "drowned out."

No one.

Every poster here, with the exception of the moderators, has exactly the same power and rights as every one else. If something ANYONE says bothers ANYONE else, they can CHOOSE to not ever have to SEE those person's posts ANYWHERE on this board.

As well....my post and The Leaf's post cannot be construed by ANYONE to be "drowning out" ANYTHING. Three sentences? This constitutes "drowning out"?

The reality is this: threads get derailed (despite the fact that The Leaf and my posts did not derail anything.) It is simple human nature. And no matter how eloquent and condemning your speeches are AGAINST that, it's never going to change, because that's how human social interaction WORKS.

If you want to keep things on topic, keep things on topic. You will have ZERO problem finding others who wish to keep things on topic with you. As for those you imagine to be "derailing" or "disparaging" or "mocking" this or any thread of yours, the choice is simple: ignore them.

Then, you will see no one who is not speaking "on topic."

Of course, I must also mention that, if you do in fact DO that, you'll eventually be speaking to no one AT ALL.

Do you feel some sense of accomplishment when fellow members try to have a conversation in here and you succeed in disrupting it?

You're projecting again. You're also trying to indict me by passive/aggressively accusing me of something that never happened, but couching it as if it DID happen, as if it's a foregone conclusion, and then asking if that "makes me happy."

It's the same sort of thing the lawyer says to the man on trial "so...have you stopped beating your wife?"

There's no simple answer to that.

Believe me, I've played mind games with the best of them.

No one disrupted anything but you. You disrupted your own thread by going off on this tangent. I am merely responding to your disruption of your own thread.

No one else disrupted this thread.

If I am correct in interpreting what you are saying, then this is not meant to be THE board for Valiant fans.

Let me clear that up for you: you are not correct in interpreting what I am saying.

Instead its only meant to be A board for those valiant fans with a certain personality type and that there is no room or consideration for those who just want to talk comics.

Nothing could be further from the truth. If you have a problem with fraternal interaction, which is universal, regardless of the near infinite variety of topics that fraternal interaction can sustain, I can't help you with that.

You apparent angst over this whole situation has NOTHING to do with my side compliment on what The Leaf said. *I* wasn't even the one who made the "objectionable" observation in the first place! I merely COMPLIMENTED it! And now, we have several lengthy posts because of a side compliment...?

.

If there is angst involved here, then it is mutual.

No, see, you're misunderstanding yet again. YOUR angst is over nothing. MY angst is over your incredible intolerance for anyone who doesn't "toe the topic line", and your insistence that anyone who posts anything that you don't think is in direct relation to the topic at hand is therefore maliciously and deliberately trying to derail it.

(see how easy that was?)

Complimenting something, essentially repeats and endorses it. So it is disingenuous to try and step back and try to say ‘it wasn’t me.’

Whatever you say.

Finally...and I mean this quite seriously, so please do not misunderstand: LIGHTEN UP.

You'll find the board FAR more enjoyable that way.

I appreciate what you are saying, but you also need to take your own advice.

No, not really. I don't go around telling people that they're bad for not keeping on topic. I don't go around forcing people to stay on topic, and then vociferously condemning them, as you are doing, if they don't.

I let people be people, and post whatever they feel like, whenever they feel like, wherever they feel like. I believe in personal freedom like that.

If I have a problem with the way an individual posts, I ignore them, either manually or physically. I don't dictate what they can and cannot post.

You could have taken the same approach after my first response, but clearly you yourself did not lighten up.

Nah, you made an outlandish reaction, and it's important that it be responded to.

I do enjoy this board.

Really?

Are you sure....?

I enjoy it for the opportunity to share my interest in valiant comics. There is a lot of humor here, and I appreciate a good portion of it. But I see some individuals too self absorbed to notice or care that not everyone is laughing at their antics, and that my friend is not fraternal or convivial.

Then ignore them. Stop trying to condemn and control them.

I have already received confirmation that I am not alone in this.

I'm sure. Quite the courageous fellows, aren't they...?

Part of mutual respect would be using some discretion as to when comments enhance a thread or detract from them.

Part of mutual respect is in not dictating how, what, where, and when others may post.

Who are you to decide when someone is using discretion? Who am I? Again, the answer is: no one. You may think comments may detract from a thread....others may think they enhance them.

That's certainly not your determination to make. Nor is it mine. Nor SHOULD it be anyone's, within reasonable limits.

I hope that is the direction we go in, and hopefully not one of the other alternatives.

I certainly don't hope that people are afraid to make a comment whenever they would like to, for fear of being severely chastised by people like you.

[ZephyrWasHOT!!]

And if you read all of that, I have a free Ninjak Gold for you...

[TKWill]

And if you read all of that, I have a free Ninjak Gold for you...

Whew! I am glad I already got mine, no incentive to read through it. I started to just scroll through it and had to spin the scroll wheel again and again and again and then just decided to give up. I'm sure it is well though out though. "A" for effort.

[ZephyrWasHOT!!]

Larry, Curly, Curly Joe, Shemp, and Moe, would you mind stopping this endless retoric and letting the thread get back on track? I for one would like this topic to continue uninterrupted.

YOU....? Were you able to say that with a straight face....?

Despite Zephyr's assertion

Is that fat chick posting on these boards again...? Man, she's HOT!

that a public answer is impossible to get, there is evidence of at least one individual (Christopher Priest) who could shed light on the subject of VIP's true identity, and I for one would like Brian (the Comic Book Legends guy) to look in on it.

I said an OFFICIAL answer, not a PUBLIC answer. Bit of a difference.

And the truth of the matter is this: despite the fact that someone may have approached Christopher Priest, and the fact that that person may become known, that person cannot NOW confirm or deny ANYTHING, being part of an NDA.

It doesn't help the case to have Brian open this thread and see you fighting over stupid comments (of which all of you are guilty of making).

I'm sorry, where is the fighting....?

And were you able to say THAT with a straight face....?

If you have the urge to keep fighting, please take it elsewhere and let this thread continue without your scuffle.

Again, I see no scuffle or fighting. Points have been raised, and points have been answered. Since there is no goat OR legion of superheroes, I cannot see how you think this is "fighting".

[ZephyrWasHOT!!]

tl;dr.

Looks like Z has a new playmate.

Well....I wouldn't say playMATE....

[ZephyrWasHOT!!]

I already apologized to Geomancer for pooping in the thread earlier. He's right, not every thread has to be filled up with goofy comments, and it's nice to see that guys like Cronin and Greg put some good info in here to help answer his question.

That said, I also like watching a good scrap. And if somebody would write "<shakes fist>" I'd be tickled pink.[/i]

"<shakes fist>"

Are you pink yet?

[ZephyrWasHOT!!]

Larry, Curly, Curly Joe, Shemp, and Moe, would you mind stopping this endless retoric and letting the thread get back on track? I for one would like this topic to continue uninterrupted.

Despite Zephyr's assertion that a public answer is impossible to get, there is evidence of at least one individual (Christopher Priest) who could shed light on the subject of VIP's true identity, and I for one would like Brian (the Comic Book Legends guy) to look in on it.

It doesn't help the case to have Brian open this thread and see you fighting over stupid comments (of which all of you are guilty of making).

If you have the urge to keep fighting, please take it elsewhere and let this thread continue without your scuffle.

Wait... this is coming from MoTA?

[ZephyrWasHOT!!]

Couldn't Priest be sued for giving out this private information?

only if he was part of the lawsuit.

i agree. Thats why it might work in his case. He was approached by VIP, but never officially worked for them.

So he is in a unique position of knowing who they are but not being affiliated directly with either party.

Now it could be that VEI prefers not to have him say anything - especialy if they have plans to hire him in the near future for fresh Quantum & Woody material.

But barring that, I believe that if they were not legally restricted from speaking, VEI wouldn't mind doing so - and would not have any liability or hurt feelings of Priest chose to go on the record about what he knows. But this is all total supposition on my part.

And DF could easily deny any claims by Priest.

And then how "official" would that be....?

Look, folks...like The Leaf originally said, the answer is staring us right in the face. It's the elephant in the room. It can't be addressed directly, but everyone knows it's there.

[ZephyrWasHOT!!]

Couldn't Priest be sued for giving out this private information?

Sued by who?

It's been inferred in this thread that VIP no longer exist.

The only ones who could sue him would be VIP's owners, and to do that they would need to reveal their identity.

If he was involved with the lawsuit in a Non-Disclosure type instance I think it would be contempt of court... ...but WTF do I know...where's woogie when you need him...

Here I is!

A non-disclosure agreement is typically something that governs the exchange of information/ideas between potential business partners, while a confidentiality agreement is something that typically comes into play in the context of settling a dispute.

Mr. Priest and VIP may have signed some sort of non-disclosure agreement when they were discussing the possibility of his working on Q&W under their banner which may prevent him from discussing their identity or anything associated with their interaction.

Less likely is that Mr. Priest is subject to a stipulation containing a confidentiality clause, mainly because he was not a party to the litigation between VIP and Valiant Entertainment. While it is not unheard of for non-parties to be part of a settlement agreement between litigants, the usual contexts which give rise to that sort of resolution do not appear to be applicable to the VIP/VE/Priest dynamic.

Finally, the remedy for a breach of a settlement agreement can sometimes be a type of 'contempt' (an action to enforce a money settlement springs to mind), however, more typically there is some clause in the agreement itself which dictates what happens if one of the parties to the agreement breaches its terms.

I'll PM you my bill...

My apologies....I exchanged the words "Non-Disclosure Agreement" (which words were used when the information was related to me) with "Confidentiality Agreement". I apologize for not being a lawyer, and using the terms interchangeably.

[ZephyrWasHOT!!]

And if you read all of that, I have a free Ninjak Gold for you...

Whew! I am glad I already got mine, no incentive to read through it. I started to just scroll through it and had to spin the scroll wheel again and again and again and then just decided to give up. I'm sure it is well though out though. "A" for effort.

I'm sure the recipient will read it, and I'm sure they'll have a response. Let's see who has more patience...the recipient or a moderator.

You all KNOW how much patience *I* have. Or is that doggedness? Persistence? Stubbornness? Bullheadedness? Pigheadedness?

Nice name change, by the way!

[ZephyrWasHOT!!]

Oh yeah?

[/i]!

[/i]!

Me either.

Stop derailing this thread! <shakes fist>

Don't MAKE me pull this thread over!

[depluto]

I already apologized to Geomancer for pooping in the thread earlier. He's right, not every thread has to be filled up with goofy comments, and it's nice to see that guys like Cronin and Greg put some good info in here to help answer his question.

That said, I also like watching a good scrap. And if somebody would write "<shakes fist>" I'd be tickled pink.[/i]

"<shakes fist>"

Are you pink yet?

[/i]!

[Geomancer]

That's fine. There are certainly people who think the world is a flat disc around which the sun, moon, and stars rotate. I don't agree with them, either.

Evidently agreeing to disagree is something you are unwilling or incapable of doing. So be it.

[geomancer quote] Clearly fellow members do not feel this way or share this view so why try to interfere wit its continuation?

You're going to have to be specific, here. Which members? And "which way"? Which "view" is not shared?

If you mean that the obviousness of….

It seems evident from your posting that you believe there will be nothing further from any of the parties involved or with firsthand knowledge of the events relating to the filings and lawsuit. This is the view that is not shared. As to which members, read through the thread again yourself.

As far as "interferring", cleary you have not bothered to read a word I typed. No one can "interfere" with any topic here. It's impossible for a regular member to "interfere" in ANY discussion.

I’m sorry but I have to be blunt and say that is empty rhetoric on your part. Even you know I’ve been reading the words you have been writing here. I’ve already outlined what I consider interference, feel free to disagree.

If you don't like the contribution of a certain member, instead of complaining about it, as you are doing here, and falsely accusing people of "interferring", allow me to introduce you to the "ignore" feature on this message board:

Take your own advice. Introduce yourself to the ignore feature.

The thread has "been on track" the entire time.

This back and forth is a side track. One we are both guilty of and seem to be destined to continue on with.

Had you simply ignored The Leaf's statement, and my compliment of said statement, instead of making a federal case out of it, NOTHING WOULD HAVE COME OF IT, and the thread would have continued as it has, only without these periodic "interferrances."

And the same goes for your counterresponses. Saying that I’m the one who has made a federal case of it is hypocritical.

In other words: YOU, by wildly overreacting, created this whole tête - à - tête we now have going on.

See how that works?

That would be my view of your responses. See how that works?

What you're doing is to get someone to violate an NDA. You want "official" word. The only way you are going to get "official" word is if someone violates an NDA.

There is an OUTSIDE....very SLIM....chance that SOMEONE who is not party to the NDA coud tell you "for sure" who VIP was....but that would not be OFFICIAL (since you're parsing, let's parse all the way), since the OFFICIAL parties involved are under an NDA, and, of course, those parties would now DENY this information, since it is now part of an NDA. See how that works?

Man of the Atom already pointed out one candidate. Perhaps Brian Cronin with his resources and connections could unearth another. You can assume failure from the start and never try while we can discuss ways of trying to succeed.

Again, do you see how that works?

You are laboring under the impression that anyone has disparaged this thread.

Please point out to me, in these two posts, where the "disparagement" is:

I shared my list of behaviors I consider to be trolling. That was one of them, and not the most relevant to this situation.

If you're going to choose to be offended by innocuous statements like this, you're not going to do well in social situations. I suggest you develop a MUCH, MUCH thicker skin before trying.

That’s my impression of you.

Have YOU ever hung out in a social situation, and forced people to stay on a particular topic until YOU were satisfied with said topic...?

True that would be awkward. It would also be awkward if two or more people were having a conversation and someone else dropped in and randomly said something tangential and strange. Just so there is no misunderstanding, by this I’m referring to observed behaviors in general and not necessarily this thread.

I'm sure Jedi, Myron, Woog, Hobo, and Depluto all got a laugh when they read that you think I am used to people "deferring" to me, as if I hold some high position of esteem around here.

I didn’t say they did, I inquired.

And as I think YOU can already tell, I TRULY don't care what your opinion of me is. I say what I have to say, and I expect others to say what they have to say. If they like what I have to say, great. If they challenge what I have to say, they better be prepared to back it up. If they don't like what I have to say, ignore me.

So here’s the part where you don’t care. Okay. That doesn’t match up with what you said earlier how people should care, does it? Otherwise I seem to have a similar standard as to what you’ve expressed here.

I have said what I believe regarding "elite" status on these boards, and don't care to go into them at this time. There are plenty of posts on that matter; a bit of research on them will lead you to them, if you are interested. Suffice it to say, every poster on this board is equal to every other poster, and lives or dies by the merits of their posts...and nothing else, not post count, not pecking order, not social status....changes that. .

With all sincerity, that’s great.

Clearly, you have not. CLEARLY! You completely and wildly overreact to a couple of throwaway sentences, and then go on and on about "respect" and "mocking" and "derailing threads"....and you expect anyone to believe you have ANY understanding of how things operate around here....?

.

I think an objective third party would say the overreaction is mutual here.

We now know how each other will proceed from here on out.

[ZephyrWasHOT!!]

I played an old trick, and read none of that.

I doubt any of it is pertinent.

If I fancy, maybe I'll read it and respond....but, as you've clearly demonstrated you are incredibly intolerant, demanding and controlling, I doubt it.

[Geomancer]

You are describing your own qualities

There's nothing more i can do to help you.

[ZephyrWasHOT!!]

You are describing yourself with that comment.

"I know you are, but what am I".....!?

That's ALL you've GOT???





CLASSIC!

I have now been "put in my place" with a CLASSIC internet comeback!

What are you gonna bust out next....?

"BURN!!!!"

"FACE HARD, *SQUEE*!!!!"

[ZephyrWasHOT!!]

You are describing your own qualities

There's nothing more i can do to help you.

Nice quick edit, too!

[Geomancer]

You really see your previous response as having been better?




Well, of course you do.

[ZephyrWasHOT!!]

You really see your previous response as having been better?

I dunno; that's up to the audience to decide, as ever.

A concept I'm quite sure you're unfamiliar with.

Well, of course you do.

Well, of COURSE *I* do....you should, too!

[ZephyrWasHOT!!]

You really see your previous response as having been better?




Well, of course you do.

Oh, and at least my previous response wasn't a Geek paraphrasing of one of the oldest cliches in the "Lame Retort" thesaurus.

[Geomancer]

You are describing your own qualities

There's nothing more i can do to help you.

Nice quick edit, too!

Yes it was.

The thing is you and I have different tastes.

We see things differently.

Maybe we can disengage from the back and forth. But the truth is it seems we are each going to be posting in ways that will be at odds with each other.

We both care about Valiant Comics, at least there's that.

[Geomancer]

You really see your previous response as having been better?




Well, of course you do.

Oh, and at least my previous response wasn't a Geek paraphrasing of one of the oldest cliches in the "Lame Retort" thesaurus.

"geek"? "lame"?



as opposed to your pithy, cliche free offerings?

You really are unable to step outside of yourself and recognize how guilty you are of the very things you are accusing me of.

And when locked in with someone convinced that their opinion is fact. There's not much you can do to help with that.

[ZephyrWasHOT!!]

You are describing your own qualities

There's nothing more i can do to help you.

Nice quick edit, too!

Yes it was.

The thing is you and I have different tastes.

This is news? (I doubt our tastes are that much different, but you know, anything to be contrary.)

We see things differently.

Clearly.

Maybe we can disengage from the back and forth.

I will if you will.

But the truth is it seems we are each going to be posting in ways that will be at odds with each other.

No, the truth is, you think you have the right to shame, criticize, and complain people away from posting. You don't.

The only way "we" will be posting in ways that will be "at odds with each other" is if you continue to tell people when, where, how, and what they may post. Otherwise, I have no issue with anything you are going to be posting.

You're not the first person on this board to try this, and you certainly won't be the last.

The difference between you and I? I may challenge the CONTENT of someone's post, but I do not tell people when, where, how, and what they may post. Everyone is free, in my opinion, to post wherever they want, whenever they want, whatever they want, in any manner they see fit that doesn't disrupt the board's coding or violate Greg's rules.

You don't believe that.

I've posted on this board for a longgggg time (relax, that doesn't mean that I therefore "think I have more right than you to post.") My posting certainly isn't going to change.

We both care about Valiant Comics, at least there's that.

At least we'll always have Rome....

[ZephyrWasHOT!!]

You really see your previous response as having been better?




Well, of course you do.

Oh, and at least my previous response wasn't a Geek paraphrasing of one of the oldest cliches in the "Lame Retort" thesaurus.

"geek"? "lame"?



as opposed to your pithy, cliche free offerings?

IF...IF I offered ANY cliches....they certainly weren't anywhere near as obvious and blatant as yours.

You don't think "I know you are, but what am I" is a lame retort....?

Really.....?

You really are unable to step outside of yourself and recognize how guilty you are of the very things you are accusing me of.

Wow! You are like a textbook study in classic internet deflection technique! In this one, Geomancer attempts to deflect the attention spotlighting his own shortcomings by turning it back around and spitting out yet another version of "I know you are, but what am I?" at me. He is attempting to lessen the impact of my "accusations" by saying "well, yeah, you do the SAME THING, and you're not even AWARE of it, so THERE!" He is attempting to get the audience to think he is more "enlightened" than me, because he implies that HE is at least aware of his flaws, by "pointing out" how I remain blissfully ignorant of mine. Classic!

What'll he come up with NEXT??

"So, have you stopped beating your wife yet?"

Seriously, where did you learn to debate...?

You clearly aren't used to debating with someone who can not only debate your words, but the innuendo, implication, and psychology behind them as well, are you?

Oh, and the correct phrase is "of which you are accusing me."

Watch your preposition placement.

(Oh yes he did jus' correc' yo gramma! Mmm HMMM!)

And when locked in with someone convinced that their opinion is fact. There's not much you can do to help with that.

Yes, I know! So stop doing that already! Sakes alive!