By Rob Bricken in
Comics, Merchandise
Wednesday, Jan. 27 2010 @ 9:47AM
 |
While I'm updating this story, I would like to apologize to ComicBookMovie.com. If you've been reading the comments from this article, you've probably noted that CBM's editor and several of its readers have been absolutely losing their shit because 1) I used a pic that CBM painstakingly crafted from two of the promo images Kotobukiya sent out to, oh, several hundred nerd sites and online stores, and 2) I didn't credit their story in the article, although I never saw it and I've credited CBM all the other times I've found material through them.
To address point #1, I have obviously changed the image to one of the many, many, many promo images sent out by Kotobukiya and found on countless sites throughout the internet. I can't even imagine how much time and effort it took for CBM to put two pictures next to each other and somehow, as if by magic, produce a single image from them, but obviously my use of it mocks the skills used to create it. My theft was inadvertent -- I took it from the Daily POP, which didn't mention they took it from CBM (a link has since been added) -- but I'm going to have to live with the shame of what I've done for the rest of my life.
To address point #2, I didn't see the story. The Daily POP didn't mention ComicBookMovie in its article, and thus I had no way of knowing that CBM's story existed, as the Daily POP's author admits in the comments below (he seems like a reasonable dude, FYI). I can prove that I never saw CBM's article because, if I had I would have realized the Cap statue couldn't possibly be from a Cap movie because CBM's article is so stupid.
You may see their article for yourselves, wherein they make the claim that since Kotobukiya has made many Marvel movie-based statues, perhaps all of their statues are Marvel movie-based. They show the Cap statue along with a Thor statue which are correctly labeled part of a Reborn-themed line -- and yet somehow, CBM thinks that these are going to be the costumes for the movies. Look, I'm fuzzy on comics, but even I know that Reborn statues are based on Marvel's Reborn comic series, and even if I didn't, Thor's had that same fucking outfit for at least two years. The Thor statue is definitely not from the movie, so it stands to reason Cap isn't either. Had I read CBM's article, I would have come to that conclusion. But -- and here's the important part -- I didn't.
See, CBM? Proof positive I didn't read your article. If I had, I would have written a totally different article (the original is after the jump, for posterity), and I also would have credited CBM as I have every other time. Admittedly I would have credited your article as being incredibly fucking stupid, but rest assured it would have been credited. Hope this clears things up! And if next time you have a problem with TR, feel free to assume I have some dark ulterior motive and leave a comment for me beginning "Hey Jackass." I react really well to that, as you can obviously see.
The original article begins here: Okay, Captain America doesn't have a new head, per se, just a new mask/head covering -- at least in this upcoming Cap statue from Kotobukiya. It appears that this is classic Cap, which is to say non-Bucky-Cap, since he's not carrying a gun, the flag design on his chest isn't triangular, and he's not really shiny.
So the question is, where the hell did Kotobukiya get this helmet design? I sincerely doubt they made it up themselves. The Daily POP, who found the pic, thinks it could be based on the Cap costume designs for the upcoming movie -- not a bad theory, since I imagine Cap's standard little head wings would be impossible to make work on-screen, and having wings printed on a helmet seems like a smart alternative. On the other hand, why would Kotobukiya be making a statue based on the Captain America movie before anyone's even been cast? My guess is that when the original Cap returns to the Marvel U -- which should be happening pretty soon now -- this will be his new costume. I know Marvel's promotional art for their advance titles show Cap in his standard duds, but I just have to think this is more likely from the comics than the movie.
Oh, and for the record, I dig it. I dig the helmet and I dig the printed wings on the side. The only thing I don't like are the exposed ears, but Cap has always had those, and I've always thought it was a terrible idea that no soldier would accept, even a super-soldier.
186 comments
Comments
ZADL said:
The Ultimates.
Wait. Does he currently have a new outfit in The Ultimates? Because he's wearing something different in Ultimates 1 and 2, both in modern time and WWII-eras.
He wears that helmet in a few issues of The Ultimates, I'm not sure of the numbers of the issues because I only have the trades, but if you look in Ultimates 2, Gods and Monsters, he's wearing something very much like that while rescuing hostages in Iraq.
deadbug said:
He's got a new hat!
Adlai said:
Isn't this the WW2 costume in Reborn?
PJ said:
You'll also note that along with the WWII-style helmet/markings, he's also got a kickass pair of almost WWII-style spats (or gaiters) on over his boots, instead of boots that are entirely red. That, frankly, is badass. I have to think that this remodel of Capt. America, whatever else may be involved, is meant to hearken back to his roots of Nazi-killinz. Sweet.
I've never been a big Cap follower, personally, but that model's pretty damn cool.
Local Aaron said:
I'm pretty sure Steve Rogers has been in Iron Man the last two issues, maybe it's just shipping schedules that are out of whack, but I thought he was back.
Greymattersplat replied to Local Aaron:
Rob gave credit to where he got the story from. If they didn't give you credit for it, that's on them.
This is definitely the suit from Reborn, which bugs me a little in its revisionism, considering the helmet and boots are new designs, and they only started drawing the tunic like it was chain mail in the last five years or so...and none of this existed in any of the WWII-era Cap stuff that I remember ever seeing up to this point. However, it's still way better than the rubber ears of that crappy 90's movie version.
Greymattersplat replied to Greymattersplat:
Apparently, it didn't change when I changed my mind and instead of saying "yes, he's already back, even though I don't think the last issue of his return story is out yet" (mostly because I wanna say it came out last week, but I can't remember for sure), and instead tried to respond to P Filipponi.
Apologies.
nick replied to Greymattersplat:
I wouldn't worry about angering the highly reputable folks at ComicBookMovie.com. They flat-out stole a story of mine from AMCTV.com a while back. I mean cut and pasted it verbatim and passed it off as their own work.
The editor was nice enough to delete the article after the fact, though I still think they should have linked to the piece in a shorter post in the first place instead of cutting and pasting the entire article and getting all the hits and comments themselves.
I would highly recommend that any writer who cares about their work steer clear. I've talked to several other writers at AMC and other places that had the same thing happen to them. The fact that they are making a stink about a photo is utterly ridiculous.
Greymattersplat replied to nick:
Wow. For starters, let me just say that I'm sad to hear you got ripped off like that. That's just wrong. However, you have just single-handedly made this whole FUBAR situation both 30X more awesome and sad AT THE SAME TIME! You are my new hero. Thank you.
Actually, my apology post above came from the fact that I originally hit "reply" on the post from "Local Aaron" that was going to address the fact that Cap really was back already even though the book where he comes back was way late. Then I saw the post from P Filipponi and changed my mind because I didn't want to make a bunch of posts. Because apparently my middle name is "irony". I must have either forgotten to hit the reply button for the right post, or it just didn't register...but it put the post here instead. Hence the apology...because I was putting in a second post, where I had only planned to weigh in once. Because again, irony is funny.
P Filipponi said:
Please give me credit for this information. I wrote the article you based this off of and I created the picture you used.
demoncat said:
the designers of the statue proably got Caps head from designs marvel gave them when they okayed the making of it for the statue with that design actully looks good and a new head should not matter its still captain america the orginal version
Docta C. Bridges said:
I agree. I haven't been up to date on comics in the last few months, so I don't know what any of his costumes look like, but the headgear definitely looks reminiscent of a WW2 era helmet, along with the style of boots and the pouches on his belt.
Rob Morales said:
Hey jackass, stop trying to play this off as your own great journalism. We know you stole it from Comic Book Movie.com
Greymattersplat replied to Rob Morales:
Hey jackass, he's got a link to where he got the story from. I first saw this come up this morning on Rich Johnston's Bleedingcool.com along with the Thor statue that Kotobukia is doing and questioning if they were BOTH looks at the costumes. This is NOT new territory. He didn't rip it off from anywhere. Unclench.
EVula replied to Rob Morales:
"Hey jackass"... yeah, you're doing it wrong.
Try again. And, since you'll be trying again, let's be British, too!
"Dear sirrah, it has come to my attention that, in an attempt to increase the meager quality of your internet postings, you have replicated content found on my own website, Comic Book Movie.com. It would be lovely if you could instead credit the original source of this earth-shattering news. Cheerio!"
See? Now doesn't that sound better?
T-B said:
Wow ive not seen this before, oh yes i have CBM. I think Mr F up there deserves some credit for his original article buddy....c'mon dont try to be a fister :(
Stephens said:
Some of the statues by this company have become more stylized as of late. I honestly think the sculptors just used various elements of Cap that they thought look cool.
T-B said:
And since you seem to DIG everything how about you dig up the original article link..
http://comicbookmovie.com/fansites/Poniverse/news/?a=14181 :P
clark said:
I really like this take on his classic costume. Well done.
Gunny said:
What a joke! How about giving CBM some credit? Fucking dumbass
Docta C. Bridges replied to Gunny:
He credited where he found it. Why should a mostly informal blog about nerd news spend the time investigating the exact chronological "source" of a piece of news about a comic book character sculpture. It's not like he just stumbled upon a story about the Iraq war and reported it as a "scoop". Please remove the large object from the collective CBM rectum.
Greymattersplat replied to Docta C. Bridges:
It doesn't help that the "original" article over at CBM is sloppy at best. Thor's had that look for almost 2 years now, since his return from the dead. That Cap costume is from Captain America: Reborn. Just a TINY bit of research would have shown that to anybody who didn't already know, and for a site that is supposed to specialize in comic book related stuff, as opposed to TR, which is the first place to admit that their comic coverage is haphazard at best...well, it just shows how well done CBM is and why I won't be going there. Especially if these are the schmucks that populate the place.
JeremyA said:
"The only thing I don't like are the exposed ears, but Cap has always had those, and I've always thought it was a terrible idea that no soldier would accept, even a super-soldier."
I'm reading Snow Crash right now and this section I read yesterday might explain the exposed ears:
"'I'm going to ask you a question that I've always wanted to ask a Kourier... [Y]ou are covered from head to toe in protective padding. So why don't you wear a helmet?'
'They say it doesn't affect your hearing, but it does.'
'That's what I suspected. We felt the same way, the boys in my unit in Vietnam. ... Our job was to go through the jungle making trouble for some slippery gentlemen carrying guns bigger than they were. Stealthy guys. And we depended on our hearing, too - just like you do. And you know what? We never wore helmets. ... They did something to your sense of hearing. I still think I owe my life to going bareheaded.'"
JordanFromJersey replied to JeremyA:
I love that book :)
I like this design from CA:Reborn as well.
McQ said:
Um, perhaps Mr F should talk to the Daily POP. That's where Rob got the story from (as he clearly linked)
This isn't freaking Watergate....
dhnaka said:
it's not from the ultimates. It's from Captain America Reborn. Bryan Hitch gave him this helmet in a few of the WW2 scenes (sort of a re-con I guess). It's just a helmet he wears in battle over his regular mask.
Anonymous replied to ZADL:
http://blog.newsok.com/nerdage/2009/06/15/first-look-at-reborn/
It's close but you'll notice the ultimate version dosen't have the wings painted on the side. The link above is a page from Reborn. I think Bryan Hitch based it on his Ultimates work
Andrew replied to ZADL:
That's not the Ultimates v2 helmet.
Rayburn said:
wow what an original concept
Docta C. Bridges replied to Rayburn:
I guarantee that the reason he didn't link to that site in his article is because of how poorly written the article is and how annoying the site is. Plus, I am pretty sure most of us here that have cerebrums don't read that slop at comicbookmovie, including Rob.
Sofia said:
Hey guy, reposting news or scoops are one thing but taking someone's editorial idea is lazy. You even took the same picture lmao
Greymattersplat replied to Sofia:
You mean the officially released Kotobukia PROMOTIONAL photos? Yeah, he totally stole those...they're not the same photos that EVERYBODY on Kotobukia's press release list got at all.
Schmucks...
Rob said:
Dear warriors of ComicBookMovie.com —
I regret to inform you that sometimes, other sites may report the exact same information you have. I know, it seems incredible, but it's possible that more than just you guys saw the pic of this Captain America statue.
For instance, I found it from the Daily POP, which I credited and linked to in the article. They do not mention CBM either — possibly because they also found the pic somewhere else, but probably because of a vast conspiracy against your site.
I know that I hate and fear ComicBookMovie.com, and given any chance, I would never give you power and clout by linking to you, except those times I did (search "comicbookmovie" or just check out the Akira fan video article I posted yesterday, via you guys).
xoxo
-Rob
BillyB replied to Rob:
So I guess it doesn't matter that you now know where the info came from? What's wrong, to lazy to change it?
Gemma replied to Rob:
Hey Rob I love your site but I gotta say that youre off base here. I never went to cbm before today so I dont hold any favoritism to them. P looks like he put alot of work into that post. I always thought that a site that posts something first should get the credit when it's reposted on another. Dont you think so?
Except CBM is so off-base it isn't even funny. Kotobukiya has made dozens of comic-specific statues that have nothing to do with the movies. There's no Iron Man comic statue because the movie just so happens to replicate the comic Iron Man almost exactly. The Thor and Cap comic-based statues are as much a hint at the movie costumes as any representation of Thor or Cap over the last few years.
keepoffthegrass replied to Rob:
Rob,
You also didnt credit Al Gore for creating the internet, nor Alexander Wilcott for creating the Camera, nor Columbus for discovering America.
.....ugh.
JordanFromJersey replied to keepoffthegrass:
That's Columbus didn't really discover America, he didn't go to North America. Lief Ericson went to NA and Columbus didn't give him editorial credit! [/sarcasm]
JordanFromJersey replied to JordanFromJersey:
And apparently I can't type/edit today. Sorry about that.
keepoffthegrass replied to JordanFromJersey:
its cool...
I was being sarcastic as well. As I dont believe any of those people have sole credit in the discoveries.
P Filipponi said:
Dearest Rob,
I know that picture came from my article because I made created it myself. I put two Kotobukiya pictures together and used this incredible site called Photobucket (or something like that) to upload it to my article.
I already contacted the esteemed blogger at DailyPOP to update his article with the relevant information.
I don't think it's that hard to ask that you do the same. Especially since you have been enlightened to the original source. Even Screenrant and WrostPreviews cite my article accordingly.
Greymattersplat replied to P Filipponi:
You're a bit of a dick, aren't you?
Here Rob, instead of citing this prick and his short-on-comic-knowledge comic site, why not use some of the pictures from Kotobukia's own website. Cap can be seen here: http://store.kotous.com/avengers-reborn-captain-america-fine-art-statue.html and the main link to the website is: http://www.kotous.com/
keepoffthegrass replied to P Filipponi:
Oh yeah....well who TOOK the photo of the statue??
Holy shit. Can you give credit to the guy who put that stick up your ass?
Zach Oat said:
How dare you report something other sites have reported on, Rob? DON'T YOU KNOW THEY HAVE DIBS?! Granted, it's unfortunate that the other sites seem to be borrowing CBM's extremely intricate and complex composite image, which clearly took several hours of Photoshop work, but hey. Them's the breaks. I'll take the 2 minutes and send you an image I composited from the originals to look EXACTLY like that one, so you can switch it out, easy-peasy.
Zach Oat said:
Hey, ask CBM if they have written permission from Kotobukiya to use the images! That's a fun question, too.
P Filipponi replied to Zach Oat:
Actually I do have permission to use their images. I'm a US distributor for the company. That's why I can't show the images of the new Iron Man statue that go with Thor and Cap.
Zach Oat replied to P Filipponi:
Wait, really? CBM is a partner site to a company that sells Koto statues? If you make your money off of selling Koto statues, isn't running a "news site" where you conveniently report on Koto statues a conflict of interest? And do you really care who gets the credit if it leads to people wanting to buy more Koto statues? My vestiges of sympathy for you just went out the window, and the fact that you don't seem to know the whole story on the products you SELL is even more bizarre.
P Filipponi replied to Zach Oat:
No buddy, the site has nothing to do with distribution. I own part in two companies, one of which sells collectibles. We are vendors for Koto along with DS. My function at CBM doesn't have anything to do with sales. So, what's your point?
Greymattersplat replied to P Filipponi:
So you mean that you personally have rights to show Koto promotional pics then? Because that's completely different from the site having those same rights. If you're publishing them in your capacity as a distributor, then you're within your rights, but it's a clear conflict of interest. If you're publishing them in you capacity as someone who writes for the site, then it's not a conflict, but it's outside your sphere of permission.
So which is it?
P Filipponi replied to Greymattersplat:
That's why I only used images from official press releases. No conflict at all :)
iamsam replied to P Filipponi:
did you really write that article yourself? if you did nice job it was a fun read. cheers
Greymattersplat replied to P Filipponi:
Then why make such a big deal about being a distributor? Why not just say "I pasted together two of the promo pictures that Koto WANTS people to put up places", and leave it at that?
Did you really just want to brag that you've seen pics of the Iron Man statue too? To Zach Oat you wanted to brag about how cool and important you are to a company like Kotobukiya? Really? Do you know ANYTHING about toys and statues?
Lucy replied to Greymattersplat:
Why are being such a jerk to this guy :( You're the one that was rude from the start
Greymattersplat replied to Lucy:
Four reasons:
1) If he truly felt that he was getting the shaft, then he should have been a big boy about it and emailed Rob through the very handy link at the top of the page, explain the situation, and ask for some assistance on the matter. That's how big boys act.
2) The "original article" that he's going on about is terrible. It's poorly researched, if at all, and looks basically like an attempt to create buzz where there wasn't anything to buzz about. Anyone who works for a site that specializes in writing about movies based on comic books should know enough to know that what he's saying are the possible movie designs are anything but. As I said previously, Thor's had that outfit for closing in on TWO YEARS now...at the very least for over a year (my memory on the subject is slightly fuzzy at the moment), and a brief look at the Kotobukiya site itself shows that they even say RIGHT THERE ON THE PAGE that these are based on the "Avengers: Reborn" concept that is going on in the comics sort of now, but more-so in the near future.
3) He's claiming the picture as his own, when all it is, is two of Koto's pics, spliced together in the same frame. It's 3 minutes worth of work at best, and acting like Rob purposely ripped off some kind of major intellectual property.
4) The parade of asshats that came in and started the whole "where's his credit" campaign, where if they had even bothered to read the actual article, they would have seen that Rob credited exactly where he got his info, and if that guy didn't credit his source (yes, I know he is NOW, he wasn't before) then that's hardly Rob's fault.
And a bonus 5th reason: I've been where Rob is and done, essentially, what Rob does. And this was way before the word "blog" even existed. I know what it's like to have someone accuse of stealing their work when you've done no such thing, and I have absolutely no tolerance for it.
I think that about covers it.
Greymattersplat replied to Lucy:
Also, I wasn't rude "at the start". I said pointed out that Rob had, in fact, cited HIS source, and if they hadn't cited theirs then you could hardly blame Rob for that. I didn't get rude until somebody started off with "hey jackass".
Lucy replied to Greymattersplat:
Ok, but why do you have to be a jerk to P when he wasn't talking to you at all? He addressed the author of the article, so it was none of your business. You chose to be immature and take a step in a rude direction.
Ohh, and it looks like the owner of DailyPOP apologized and fixed the problem on his site, don't you think Rob should do the same? I mean you're all about doing what's right, don't you think correcting an error is the right thing to do?
He called a friend of mine a thief, over an innocent mistake that boiled down to a matter of semantics, in a public forum. Game on.
Lucy replied to Zach Oat:
Ohh, He called your e-friend a thief! That's a different story!
When did he do that? I must have missed it. Can you please show me where in his comments he called Rob a thief?
Real friend, not e-friend. He was a groomsman in my wedding. I've known him for ten years.
First post by the statue salesman:
"Please give me credit for this information. I wrote the article you based this off of and I created the picture you used."
Rob did not base his story off of the man's article, and had never even read it. I also disagree with his use of the term "create." He put two pics next to each other.
Lucy replied to Zach Oat:
So you do know him well? That's great for you, forgive me for assuming.
I still fail to understand how you interpreted "thief" from that statement of his. I've tried finding where he calls your friend a thief anywhere on this thread. I can't find one word that could be accurately construed in the general direction of thievery. Don't you think you're exaggerating alot? It's pretty obvious you're just trying to prove a futile point.
The quote of CBM's I posted said Rob based his article off of another article. In professional Internet bloggerspeak, that means "you thief, you retyped my words."
Re-blogging someone's exclusive is shady, especially where no credit is given, but given the non-news of the CBM story, and the fact that it wasn't even Rob's source, I don't think any credit to him is due. I was kind of on his side that his barely modified picture had been re-used, until I found out that he also co-owns a Koto distributor, which is where he got the images. It's his job to disseminate promotional materials, but not his job to pass himself off as an impartial reporter and spread false information.
Lucy replied to Zach Oat:
Again, where are you getting these blatant accusations? All I read is one sentence where he asked for credit for an opinion piece he wrote days ago. He never reported it as a news scoop, did he? His response to being a distributor was to a question asking him if he had authority to use the company's pictures. You're taking this whole thing out of context and you throwing insults. Why continue the charade?
I didn't say it was an exclusive, or that he was claiming an exclusive, only that to re-blog an exclusive without credit is shady. As this was NOT an exclusive, and there was no actual news in CBM's article, only rampant speculation (odd for someone who has an inside line to Koto), crediting CBM for anything is really not necessary. Even the pictures were not unique to his site, unless you think a man should be given credit for pasting two pictures together, which I do not. They're Koto creative property, and he has no claim to them, or to his ability to juxtapose them in a permanent fashion.
Namor replied to Lucy:
Lucy, Why is he being rude?
Because you all started bitching about this in a public forum. If you wanted this to be a private matter then you shouldn't have flooded the comments section with your nonsense.
Lucy replied to Greymattersplat:
Another thing, guys like you that attempt to twist people's words in an effort to make yourself seem intelligent are infantile at best. I know you were being a jerk to him because you flat out wanted to. Claiming your territory and the like. Why not just say that? Why hide behind paragraphs of phony rhetoric? Don't you guys always say 'Man up' in the face of adversary? Stop trying to talk your way out of it and make yourself sound like the good guy.
Greymattersplat replied to Lucy:
Actually, I don't really think it's necessary for him to alter his at all. Except maybe to change out the picture so people shut up about it. If he wants to change his sourcing to something like "CBM via Daily P.O.P", then that's up to him, but he still has the source that HE got the information from up, and that's really all he's got to do. If people want to follow the chain further down, that's up to them, and they now have that option.
Also, I never said I was being anything other than a jerk about it, and I never tried to make myself sound smarter than I am. If I were trying to do that, I'd have less typos. I'm not staking any claim on any "territory". Being a jerk about it doesn't make me any less right, and my reasons are anything but empty rhetoric. I do find it amusing that he did what I perceive to be "aren't I a badass" posturing about his position as a distributor...specifically that he did it to Zach Oat; though you could easily make the argument that just doing so on Rob's site is laughable, given Rob's background. For the record though, as to questioning why I said anything at all, may I refer you to reason #1 on my previous list. If he had emailed Rob, instead of trying to call him out in the middle of his own forum, it would never have happened. As it happens, I've been hyper-efficient this week already, and have very little to keep me entertained at work today until later on in the week when some new equipment arrives. As stated in my bonus reason, I already have zero tolerance for bullcrap like his accusations of thievery, so i simply stated that thievery it was not. Then people started in with "hey jackass".
A. I am intelligent, just easily baited. B. It's Rob's teritory, but as a friend and former TR freelancer I certainly took a vested interest. C. Filliponi's not really a jerk, he just seems to have an inflated sense of his own importance, and doesn't make his points in a polite way. Oh, wait, that is a jerk. D. I am not important. Important people would not waste their time on this foolishness. Clearly, I am just another jerk. E. Why am I talking to you?
Denjiro replied to Lucy:
Your attempts at being a white knight for the CMB guys are quite laughable. Please continue.
Zach Oat replied to P Filipponi:
You own or co-own two companies. One sells statues. One reports on statues, and erroneously says that a statue your other site is selling MIGHT be the movie costume! Which it is not. Trying to boost sales much? You seemed pretty quick to say here that a Reborn Iron Man is on the way, which means you knew that these actually aren't movie-related designs. Seems kinda shady, dude.
And your nit-picking about where Rob's picture came from seems unrelated (and counter-productive) to your position as a U.S. distributor of Koto product, so mentioning your position as the reason that you have the rights to use it on your "unrelated" "news" site is not only inaccurate, it's irrelevant. Does Koto know you run a news site? Or wrote that inaccurate, speculative story that an e-mail to the company you have a business relationship with could have cleared up?
Greymattersplat replied to Zach Oat:
And if they do, if they have permission to alter them in photoshop?
Tanner said:
Yeah, this is Bryan Hitch's design from "Captain America: Reborn" when Cap is jumping around in time. I love the design. It's perfect for the movie. I always kinda hated the mini-wings.
gregg said:
Ummm why argue over this? It's stupid. Just change the reference to the original article. Too easy, right?
PJ replied to gregg:
Clearly you have not been immersed in Nerddom long enough. This is a matter of principles! And by 'principles' I mean 'saying neener-neener to an obvious asshole'.
Also, these comments make this article 100% more entertaining. Possibly 200%!
Master_Chunks said:
At the height of the Roman Empire it's foot soldiers wore similar helmets that had exposed ears, this is primarily to prevent mis-communication between commanders and troops, as most commands were barked sans mouth.
SambucaJoe said:
Jesus Christ this place is going downhill fast! Fucking A just give the guy due credit and move the fuck along.
PJ replied to SambucaJoe:
The point is that he doesn't really have due credit, in case you missed it. He just thinks he does because it's utterly impossible for anyone to conceive of an image with two pictures put alongside one another.
And also, I think we're invoking the 'he's a dick, so no' clause. Which I fully support.
WTF said:
Well, if that's the case, I guess sites like Fark.com shouldn't exist either, as they often re-write the headlines, or maynot link to the "official" site that broke the news first. For Christ's sake, get over. Nerd rage is strong in this article. How do we even know if CBM had the story first, and if these people are real? It could just be a troll.
chauncy said:
Good thing for the concrete "A" on the ground. otherwise, you know... we might mistake him for... i dunno... Captain Bmerica...
Troll said:
I'm a troll and I approve this thread
mark said:
Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah
who cares???? it is a retarded story anyway
Bugdodger said:
I say leave the source material as-is. You posted where you found it, it isn't your responsibility to email the page where you found the story and politely ask them to diagram the path of information that lead them to where they got their story so that you can properly give credit to the sculptor, original photographer, guy who changed the light bulb in the room where the photo was taken, and the IT guy who jiggled the modem cord so that it could properly be distributed online.
So Rob got his information, properly linked, from someone else who may have taken it from you, how the hell is Rob to know that?
PJ replied to Bugdodger:
Rob is the psychic lord of nerd news, didn't you know that? He's supposed to know everything and if he doesn't then omg this sight iss o lame lulz wtfbbq
Kaitie said:
This is the most entertaining thing I've read all morning. Don't give them shit, Rob! I would, however, change the picture from his apparently "intricately created splice of two pictures" and just get one from the Koto site, because, I mean, come on, he worked so hard on it! I mean, I know it's really, really hard to do that in paint, but just one image can still do the statue justice! *end sarcasm*
Docta C. Bridges said:
Well Rob, the good news is that with all of these crazies pouring in from CBM your hit count for this article is going to be phenomenal. It's like all those people who hate on music videos by commenting on YouTube, but since they go back on to argue so often, the video crawls up to millions of views.
MellsBells said:
I don't get the problem. Is the guy just trying to get credit for writing the article this came from?
Docta C. Bridges replied to MellsBells:
Rob found an article with that picture on Daily POP, which he credited. This guy came into the comments and said that he "created" the picture and the "original" article. Rob didn't know this, since he obviously didn't read the CBM article, and doesn't want to change the source since he already cited the source he actually used. This is perfectly understandable, since Daily POP didn't claim CBM as a source. Like any other research, you don't search for some kind of elusive "original source" you cite only the source that you actually used for information. So, all these folks from CBM are butthurt, since Rob didn't know that some chump up there took the time to make a sloppy article and place two pictures next to each other in Photoshop. It's a simple misunderstanding, which could be resolved by Rob ceasing all of his work that he is doing right now to add some dubious link, or that the CBM guy could just let it go because it's only the internet.
Antipater replied to MellsBells:
Clearly the problem is that this other guy somehow he thinks he deserves exclusive credit for a story that is completely not exclusive to him.
It's like the whole new-media scuffle between the AP and aggregators like HuffPo.
Except wait no it isn't because that actually matters...
Antipater replied to Antipater:
Let's also keep in mind that there isn't really any originality excercised in presenting a press release photo. Or say in combining two release images, possible in Paint.
MellsBells replied to Antipater:
No, I think the situation was taken out of context by you people. He never said his article was exclusive, he just wanted credit for the information. All P wrote was:
"Please give me credit for this information. I wrote the article you based this off of and I created the picture you used.
http://comicbookmovie.com/fansites/Poniverse/news/?a=14181
Posted 01/27/2010 at 10:01:59 AM"
It was only when you idiots became hostile that the discussion took a turn for the worst. Maybe next time you can keep your childishness in check and let the gown ups talk.
McQ replied to MellsBells:
Actually I believe this turned hostile when Rob Morales from CBM started a post with "Hey jackass"
Angela said:
This is the funniest thing I've read so far today.
Norm Connelly said:
This just looks like a misunderstanding. This guy P wasn't even being a dick it was the other guys from CBM that were acting like jackoffs. I just checked that DailyPoP page this thread cites and it DOES credit P's article.
Greymattersplat replied to Norm Connelly:
It does...NOW. It didn't an hour ago.
Norm Connelly replied to Greymattersplat:
Relax, you're going to give yourself a coronary. I don't sit at my computer all damn morning blogging my life away and waiting for updates. I check this article, check the source, then checked THEIR source.
Maybe you should get out more.
Antipater replied to Norm Connelly:
So the other site folded to a barrage of imbeciles? Depressing.
Daily P.O.P. replied to Greymattersplat:
I updated the article again with a date on the link to help on this one.
kenshiro said:
Most comments for a collectible article evar. I wish rob could inadvertently offend overly sensitive websites everyday!
Daily P.O.P. said:
There's nothing insidious on my end here.
I just forgot to add a link to the CBM article. I always cite my sources and apologized to CBM for any confusion in this case. The CBM author and I have corresponded and there are no troubles between us. All things considered, it's understandable why the author of this article didn't realize that the story originated from CBM.
What really sucks is that as someone already pointed out - it has nothing to do with the Cap movie and is based on a series that I have been shelling out $4 an issue for (excellent though it is).
I hope that clears up any confusion here.
Oh, and The Daily P.O.P is just me by the way. I hope that people take the time to read my other articles as I write at least one a day.
Kevin replied to Daily P.O.P.:
You're so nice, I'm not even going to make any Daily P.O.O.P. jokes.
Daily P.O.P. replied to Kevin:
Hahahaha!
Idris said:
OMG you guys are being so mean! Just stop, it's so unnecessary.
LEEE777 said:
; D
Can't we all me friends!???
Jackoffs lol, like that word, not heard that for a while, heh heh!
MULTI's (Poni) alright, ya just gotta get to know him better lol! : D
On another note, it is only the NET! Peace to all! : D
P.S. Wheres all the topless stuff??? : (
LEEE777 said:
ldris @ Lol!!
GUN said:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA funniest part of my day. There's enough testosterone in this thread to fuel a power plant.
MrQ said:
Rob - That update is very bad form. You should know better than to behave so childishly. I looks like you lost a pissing contest and can't get over it. Bitter is unbecoming.
McQ replied to Rob:
Oh, MrQ.... I think you just tried to take my Handle... I want credit!!!
MrQ replied to McQ:
What are you talking about? My first name is Quill. Ergo, MrQ fits.
McQ replied to MrQ:
A likely story MrQ... a likely story indeed.
MrQ replied to Rob:
No, there wasn't a contest at all. That's where you are mistaken. Did you read any of these comments? There was minor confusion followed by droves of bullshit and name calling. You decided to attempt to cover your ass from losing face with a witty tirade. All I see a bitter blogger that should simply 'get over it'.
PJ replied to MrQ:
Those sound like the words of someone losing a pissing contest.
But in all seriousness, it seemed more like droves of bullshit followed by minor confusion to me. Or maybe droves of bullshit inspired by minor confusion. Whatever, it was funny as hell, that's all I'm trying to say. And also that 'Hey Jackass' is a great way to start a flame war.
Which CBM lost, for the record. Via pissing contest.
Bugdodger said:
BWAHAHAHAHA ROB I am in love with you.
This update warms my heart.
PinballWizard said:
To all the people bitching about why can't we all be friends and just drop the issue: did you even read Nerd Commandment #1?
PinballWizard replied to PinballWizard:
And yes, I know that Commandment #1 dealt specifically with picking sides as far as nerd issues go, but I think that stopping an asshat from completing his asshattery is well worth lending nerdy argument power to.
Strangeman said:
Dear God. I can't believe there's such a poop over an article about a terribly generic super hero statue with a variant of head which may or may not exist in comicdom. Look at that thing and tell me it's worth whatever they're charging. (It's not). Why would you want a Captain America statue that doesn't even look like a classic or Ultimates Captain America? It might as well be that Rob Liefield big-boobed Captain America. At least then there'd be some reference to it in a comic.
PJ replied to Strangeman:
Don't lie. You totally believe this could happen. It's a nerd site! What do we have as a subculture if not pointless bickering?
MrQ replied to PJ:
Truer words have not been spoken
Strangeman replied to PJ:
Yes, I can believe it, but I remember when these nerd-rage sessions only lasted a few spiteful paragraphs at the most. Now it's growing into a fullblown nerd-a-palooza every time someone drops the line, "WHOSE RESPONSIBLE THIS?" If things keep going this way, someone's going to get stabbed one day, albeit with a $150 Darth Vader lightsabre replica, so it probably won't hurt...
Sono said:
*Bows amusedly to Rob*
Well done sir, Well done.
THE PR0F3550R said:
Rob please buy me that statue. I will convert from a Trekkie to a Warsie if you do.
Kaeli said:
This is why 4 out of 5 nerds prefer the taste of Topless Robot.
Greymattersplat replied to Kaeli:
The 5th, is apparently that "scary nerd" referenced in Commandment #15 from this morning.
Bobby Bless said:
Hey, Jackass... haha, I'm just fucking with you. Listen, you made a mistake. So fucking what... people do that from time to time. The fact that the fellows over at CBM are bitching that you "stole" this piece from them is retarded. I used to love going to CBM and reading the articles, but I haven't stopped by there in a very long time; mainly for the fact that every Tom, Dick and Harry stops by there to post up an "article" these days. Allegedly, you can go there, join the site and post anything you want... it doesn't even have to be comic book related anymore!!! Not only that, but, apparently, after you post up 50 articles, you become and Editor... what the fuck is that shit? By allowing people to make fan-sites and post up articles (many of which are clearly bullshit), CBM lost a lot of respect and clout in my book.
Greymattersplat replied to Bobby Bless:
Rob made no mistake. He clearly cited his source. No offense to the Daily P.O.P. guy, as he seems like good people, but he was the one who mistakenly left off his sourcing. That's hardly Rob's fault.
Bobby Bless replied to Greymattersplat:
In a sense, they are both at fault, but hey, they are both good people in my book. Again, every person makes mistakes from time to time... as I did in my comment, but my fault is that I rarely re-read things before I post them. Either way, CBM lost points in my book long ago.
KyleR replied to Bobby Bless:
Maybe you can expand on that point you made, how are they both at fault? You seem very reasonable so I'm hoping for a somewhat reasonable answer.
Bobby Bless replied to KyleR:
I say that Daily POP and Rob are both at fault because of the fact that Daily POP didn't cite the source (it has been cited since then... which is pointed out in one of the previous comments), which was CBM and the author that posted the article, and Rob is at fault mainly because he's guilty by association. Rob linked to the Daily POP article, before the citing situation was fixed, thus causing a shit-storm and a feeling that he plagiarized another person's work. Technically, Rob should have asked Daily POP where they got the information, but he didn't. It was a hiccup on his part, but he has apologized since.
It just shows that professors were right when they continuously said, "remember to cite your sources!!"
As far as the guy who posted this over at CBM; I just clicked on the "article" and read it(which doesn't have much to read in the first place). From what I see, the author didn't cite a source either. To me, it just looks like he copy/pasted some pictures that he found online. The guy even goes on to make the retarded assumption that just because Kotobukiya works with Marvel and has sculpted statues associated with Marvel's films, that his last two pictures posted (of Thor and Cap) have to be, without a shadow of doubt, associated with the upcoming Thor and First Avenger: Captain America films.
Greymattersplat replied to Bobby Bless:
Wait...ALL their Marvel work is from movie designs? Really? He sells the things, so that's got to be true, right? Because I've got this Nova one that they did last year that I can't WAIT to see on the big screen! And their Infinity Gauntlet set? When are those going to be on the big screen? I can't wait to see all the X-Men in their classic costumes either! Or the Winter Soldier, when his movie comes out!
Can't wait until Marvel gets all these movies out! Since they've got the statues done already, does that mean that the movies are coming soon? Because I'm serious when I say I want to see that Nova one.
Bobby Bless replied to Greymattersplat:
dude, the movies are already completed... didn't you hear? Ryan Reynolds is playing everyone in the Marvel Universe in one massive film that will be directed by James Cameron... sadly, the film will be so massive that it will be released in installments and take two decades until the final installment is released.
Boredlizzie replied to Bobby Bless:
Ryan Reynolds as everyone in the Marvelverse, including the ladies? I'd so watch that, even if it did take two decades!
KyleR replied to Bobby Bless:
I guess I'm not going to get a reasonable explanation after all. I was hoping for some unbiased info but apparently you're not capable of that.
"it just looks like he copy/pasted some pictures that he found online. The guy even goes on to make the retarded assumption that just because Kotobukiya works with Marvel and has sculpted statues associated with Marvel's films, that his last two pictures posted (of Thor and Cap) have to be, without a shadow of doubt, associated with the upcoming Thor and First Avenger: Captain America films"
I didn't see that anywhere in his article and I read over it twice to make sure. I figured the guy had to be a dick after all the comments here. Hell, wrong again. Are you sure you read it correctly? Maybe you should try again.
Bobby Bless replied to KyleR:
It's all about speculation in his article. The article itself is even titled "Are These the Captain America & Thor Movie Costumes?". He isn't outright saying it, but he is making the assumption that the Thor and Captain America pictures are pictures showing what they may look like in the movies. He then goes on to say, " Only Thor and Captain America are getting statues even though Iron Man is just as important in the Reborn series. Could it be because we already have Iron Man film statues to match these or will we soon see a third piece for the collection? That, in itself, isn't enough evidence to make an educated guess; but when you add the fact that Marvel Studios is exclusively contracted to them, it makes it very plausible." and goes on to follow that with, "What do you think? Are these the costumes that Marvel Studios will be using for Thor and The First Avenger: Captain America?"
All the author of the article is doing is assuming that since Marvel and Kotobukiya work closely together, that these pictures are what they are going to look like in the movie... If you go to Kotobukiya's website (http://www.kotous.com/?s=Marvel), the statues of Thor and Cap are listed, but there is no indication that they are the costumes that are going to be used in the movie, much like it is indicated on the Iron Man Mach IV statues. However, what it does indicate, which is something the author does as well, is that the Thor and Cap statues are for Marvel's Avengers Reborn line.
When it comes down to it, the author fucked up for speculating that these are the costumes that are going to be used in the movie and both Daily POP and Rob fucked up for the citing problem (which, again, has been resolved). Personally, I believe that if they were intended to be the costumes used in the movie, Kotobukiya wouldn't have posted them up as Marvel would have wanted that kept under wraps until it was closer to the release dates of the films.
KyleR replied to Bobby Bless:
I thought the point of an opinion piece was to spark discussion, not to prove a point. It's even sorted under the editorial section of CBM. IMO he didn't portray anything as fact, he was asking the readers their thoughts on it. Speculation? Sure. But he speculated both sides of the argument and left it up to the reader to decide what to believe. What's wrong with the way he did it?
I gotta say that I'm impressed by alot of the editorials and fan fiction on CBM. Today was my first time looking through the site and they have hella cool shit.
KyleR replied to KyleR:
But, yeah like this guy said below me they don't really focus on comic movies. They should change their name to *********movie.com
Bobby Bless replied to KyleR:
Personally, I believe the problem comes from how he worded it at the end, "What do you think? Are these the costumes that Marvel Studios will be using for Thor and The First Avenger: Captain America?". I think he should have said something along the lines of, "How would you feel if Marvel used these costumes in the Thor and First Avenger: Captain America films?"
Like I said before, if these, in fact, were the exact costumes used in the films, Marvel probably wouldn't want those to bee leaked out a year before the movies were released. Marvel is pretty anal about that type of stuff.
KyleR replied to Bobby Bless:
True. I could think of a couple of things I would have changed too. From the comments it doesn't look like anyone took it the wrong way though so no hard no foul. I give alot of leeway to opinion pieces since it's just one point of view. If he tried to play if off as a news scoop I would have set up an account there just to tear into him. It must have been a popular article because like 6 other sites picked up on the same theme. I gotta give him props for coming up with it first.
MrQ replied to Bobby Bless:
I have the same problem with CBM. They used to have stricter rules for only comic movie articles. Now they have every movie or tv series under the sun. It gets tiring to sift through articles there to get to the stuff I want to read about.
Bobby Bless replied to MrQ:
I gave up on CBM long ago... now it seems like if someone made a comic book movie (i.e. Del Toro) any article found can be posted. I mean, come on, there are articles for the Clash of the Titans remake... not a comic book, but is posted on the site because Leterrier did The Incredible Hulk and Worthington is pushing, allegedly, to be Captain America.
Plus, they have "authors" posting up articles who rely on Twitter and IMDB as sources. Come on now... just because some unknown actor says he just did an audition for Captain America at the Marvel Offices, doesn't mean it's true... the dude is probably just trying to get you to look up who he is. As for IMDB, for years they had Jason Patrick, Keanu Reeves and Jude Law listed to be in the WATCHMEN movie... even when Snyder's film was in post-production so they aren't a super solid source either.
PJ replied to Bobby Bless:
Wait, anybody can go over there and post articles?
Oh man. You just made my day.
Stephens said:
This entire comment thread is amazing! It's chock full of passion, comedy, and drama. Thank you Topless Robot for helping me to (once again) waste time at work!
citizen13 said:
Meh, the guys at CBM got what they set out to do and that was to generate hits to their site. By stirring up this hoopla, they got their publicity, cause any publicity is good publicity. Think of all the extra hits they got from this,..I never heard of their site and I just checked it out. Consider that they are also salesmen for the products they "report" on,..and business is good for them today.
tvtastegood said:
This was the best
I laughed so hard
Ya know in the end all this does is make baby jesus cry and Rob drink
I got less source citing critiscism in high school when I blatantly plagarised half my reports.
My hats off to CBM it must be a slow news day for ya to spend so much time getting credit and pimping your distribution company
Zortt1 said:
Bwahahaha!
This is awesome. Great day. Great day.
Topless Robot FTW.
Praise Nerd Jeebus.
Yakub Shabazz said:
Oddly not mentioned AT ALL thus far in the conversation: According to a disclaimer provided by Pietro himself on his own website, HE DIDN'T EVEN WRITE THE ARTICLE HE'S CLAIMING HE WROTE.
At the bottom of the article is this brief note: "This posting was submitted by a user of the site not from Comic Book Movie editorial staff. All users have acknowledged and agreed that the submission of their content is in compliance with our Terms of Use."
So which is it, Pietro? Are you lying on here by claiming an anonymous contributor's work as your own, or are you lying on your site so as to dishonestly avoid any potential lawsuit issues?
I'm loving all of this. And I'm pretty sure I want to go on a wild cross-country drinking binge with Rob, Zach and Greymattersplat, getting in multiple fistfights with asshat nerds from Maine to Alaska.
MrQ replied to Yakub Shabazz:
I read articles on CBM just as much as I read threads on TR and I've always seen that statement. The disclaimer is on the bottom of every article on the site and even the editor's articles. I asked about it a few weeks ago and one of the editors told me its to limit the site owner's liability for false or leaked info. Since any member can contribute articles it makes sense.
PJ replied to MrQ:
So still pretty much a lie, just a lie that they use consistently because they're aware of their own shady status. I gotcha.
Sure. Nothing wrong with that. Nothing. At. all.
MrQ replied to PJ:
How is a disclaimer a lie? That makes no sense. The point of a disclaimer is to limit liability. If a member of the site writes an article and spreads gossip then the owner of the site won't be liable. I'm smart business when you have a site like that.
PJ replied to MrQ:
Perhaps I was reading this wrong, but what it sounded like you were saying is that they use the disclaimer all the time, even if the editorial staff actually did write the piece. Which gives them the ability to say 'Oh, I wrote that, give me credit' and also 'I'm not responsible for that because it was submitted, not written by me.'
One of these statements is a lie.
I think someone also said something about 50+ posts making you and editor, and thus 'part of the editorial staff', and thus 'also a bloody liar.' What am I missing here?
Yakub Shabazz replied to PJ:
My point exactly. A blanket disclaimer stating that everything is "submitted," even the articles written by editorial staff, is dishonest in general and hypocritical in this particular instance ("I want credit but I don't want blame").
Greymattersplat replied to Yakub Shabazz:
I'm in! But I don't drink...so I guess I'll just have to be the designated driver.
Yakub Shabazz replied to Greymattersplat:
Good, because I suspect we'd need one. :)
Zach Oat replied to Yakub Shabazz:
I once drove straight through from New York to South Dakota in under 24 hours by taking turns driving with two friends. If we sleep and drink in shifts, we can punch an asshat nerd in every state in under a week.
PJ replied to Yakub Shabazz:
Oh my god. Can I film it? We'd make millions! And then lose millions from lawsuits! It'll be great!
Greymattersplat replied to PJ:
I dunno...I bet if we put together a website detailing things, we could get people to VOLUNTEER to be punched on our cross-country trip of mayhem. Maybe even get a sponsor or two!
(Sadly, I'm only mostly joking.)
Yakub Shabazz replied to Greymattersplat:
And THEN, we just put a disclaimer at the bottom of the website that we didn't actually do any of the punching! It's brilliant!
(To be honest, I don't even know if I'm joking at all. Some trolls need punches, and that's that.)
Greymattersplat replied to Yakub Shabazz:
It'd be like the end of Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back...awesomeness!
tvtastegood said:
God this thred was for a common statue of an unmentioned value where we were set to talk about ears in the helmet and it turned into a battle. Rob I love your site. Thank you sir for providing me with something to do in between stops.
EVula said:
I enjoyed reading the update and subsequent commentary far more than I enjoyed the original article. What a clusterfuck.
8BitCutman said:
Batman could kill Superman if he really wanted to.
Ahem! said:
I can't believe that this guy is complaining when Rob is basically giving him a FREE ADVERT for that statue!
This Is Me Posting said:
THE INTERNET IS SERIOUS BUSINESS.
Well done, CBM! I've never heard of your site ever until now and you've convinced me that your site is run by petulant three year olds!
NEW READER GET!
LadySheeana said:
Judging by how many idiotic CBM fans came and screamed at Rob, I wonder how long it is until we find the post where the CBM editor bitches about how Rob used the picture and tells his fans to attack.
Crab Mentality said:
In the words of A.K. (keeping with the give credit where credit's due theme):
"Nnnyeerrdd Rrriiiiooott!!!"
Baltimoron said:
I'm a long-time comic nerd who keeps the Wednesday sabbath holy. I'm also a grown-up who makes enough money to buy stuff like this but is still just childish enough to actually do so. Furthermore, I'm primarily a Marvel guy and a huge fan of both Ed Brubaker and Bryan Hitch? See where I'm going with this? I am the target demographic for the pictured statue.
"P Filipponi" should either have been less of a douchebag or not admitted to being a distributor for Kotobukiya. Thanks to him, his licensor is getting a little less money.
Roldon said:
wow, this reads like the car wreck I saw earlier today!! And human nature kept me rubber necking to stay and read the whole thing!
Awesome post Rob!
This is now my new fav nerd war!!!
I'm in for the cross country boozing road trip, but only if we can fight about what to do shooters of!
Strangeman said:
This whole thing needs to be turned into a movie. Just add some 3-D and some bare-breasted Smurf sluts and you're in.
Mario said:
I followed this since the first comment and all I got to say is. You can't pay for this kind of entertainment.
LEEE777 said:
Hey i'm good at PI$$ing competitions!!!
Bwahhahahhahhaha!!
Yo @ STRANGEMAN i see ya dude lol! ; D
Topless Robot people, um i don't see every CBM user bitching at ya lol!!
Still again wheres the topless stuff!?!?
: D
Necronomic Forecast said:
Whheeeeeee!! This is so much fun! We haven't a good old nerd battle/controversy since Brickhousebunny committed Internet Suicide.
Hugo replied to Necronomic Forecast:
Funny that you brought it up, but Brickhousebunny got a new name and a new job, writing toys news at this website, comicbookmovie, and... ohgod
LEEE777 said:
Damn, ive got that toybiz movie BATMOBILE up top, ^^^^^ cool, ity it ain't mint though lol! : p
jareedo said:
Rob, nice update to the CBM hissyfit in this piece. Well handled. I applaud your superior dicksmanship in addressing Internet Tools.
Minotauro said:
Now that all the nonsense is over, I'd like to talk to you guys about our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
shamus said:
Wow these guys from Comic Book Movie dot com are gigantic whining retards.
