Open letter from Dan Didio. (Facebook)

[Jake1823]

So perhaps, I was too harsh, but why do I still have the impressions that I have - while in almost every case, once the actual creators speak, I have a positive reaction and when it is Dan - I find it off putting? Jim

JRM

I know I've come off as combative in many posts, but I'm being sincere with this question: Do you think there's an existing bias that's clouding your judgment?

Not to say he's always awesome. There are moments of bad Dan and moments of good Dan. Mostly, he's in between. Still, I've never gotten the impression that he was ever THAT bad...

[JRM]

I know I've come off as combative in many posts, but I'm being sincere with this question: Do you think there's an existing bias that's clouding your judgement? Not to say he's always awesome. There are moments of bad Dan and moments of good Dan. Mostly, he's in between. Still, I've never gotten the impression that he was ever THAT bad...

Jake1823

Yeah, I guess that due to previous statements as well as some of his directional choices, yeah ... I start with a skeptical ear when dealing with informaion from him. However, I do believe that when he drops his "Convention Persona" I can respond fairly to what he says. But yeah, I has not earned the benifit of the doubt that I would give to Someone like Gail, Greg or even Geoff.

Jim

[jafabian]

Is there ANY bigwig publisher that's well liked?????

[JRM]

Is there ANY bigwig publisher that's well liked?????

jafabian

From this corner, not really since Dick Giordino hung up his pencil.

Jim

[TheOptimist]

Although not remotely addressed to me, I'm going to throw my hat in on that query, addressing those who might perceive Dan in negative terms...

Not long ago, I actually found myself oft offended by comments made by Dan, Joe Q. and a host of other people who regularly attended convention panels, particularly in the much earlier days of Wizard World conventions... I wondered how could someone be so rude and snarky and not be booed off stage.

But then I attended, and found him to be incredibly jovial. At one convention, I spotted him walking the floor alone and thought I'd get a quick sign and ask a quick question. He spent the next half hour talking to me with incredible enthusiasm and politely pressed me for my thoughts on various titles and initiatives. He even wrote a super-spoilery piece of info on a poster I had handy, which was very neat. Then I attended the panel and found his comments to be in much the same light. He treated people with respect and really wanted to boost the excitement. And yet, when I turned on the sources of coverage for that very panel... some of his words (often the best laughs of the day) were perceived as negative and insulting. There wasn't a particular bias slant in the publishing... but something was lost between that floor and the internet page. Since then, while not going out of my way to excuse some of the things I've heard... I consider things from as positive a perspective as possible, because that same warping effect might be going on.

Others, of course have had different experiences which have reinforced other perceptions... but I just sort of felt like sharing that little encounter.

[JRM]

Although not remotely addressed to me, I'm going to throw my hat in on that query, addressing those who might perceive Dan in negative terms... Not long ago, I actually found myself oft offended by comments made by Dan, Joe Q. and a host of other people who regularly attended convention panels, particularly in the much earlier days of Wizard World conventions... I wondered how could someone be so rude and snarky and not be booed off stage. But then I attended, and found him to be incredibly jovial. At one convention, I spotted him walking the floor alone and thought I'd get a quick sign and ask a quick question. He spent the next half hour talking to me with incredible enthusiasm and politely pressed me for my thoughts on various titles and initiatives. He even wrote a super-spoilery piece of info on a poster I had handy, which was very neat. Then I attended the panel and found his comments to be in much the same light. He treated people with respect and really wanted to boost the excitement. And yet, when I turned on the sources of coverage for that very panel... some of his words (often the best laughs of the day) were perceived as negative and insulting. There wasn't a particular bias slant in the publishing... but something was lost between that floor and the internet page. Since then, while not going out of my way to excuse some of the things I've heard... I consider things from as positive a perspective as possible, because that same warping effect might be going on. Others, of course have had different experiences which have reinforced other perceptions... but I just sort of felt like sharing that little encounter.

TheOptimist

Humm, no you sort of answered one of my latests posts ...So in the end it comes down to context - when it is just in print (just like message boards) most all the other tools (voice, body language, facial expressions, crowd reaction is mostly lost) Especially, when reported on through (what I assume to be) tweets. Very little context - not even smilies.

I haven't done a con in over 20 years - (cost, crowds, etc) - thus get most of my info through the various reports. Perhaps one thing we as a comunity here could do is -- well provide some of that context. If someone was at a pannel and felt that the reporting lacked the necessary context - supply some, especially for the contentious parts. Over in the Women in comics thread, someone posted the audio of the situation, as well as, first hand viewpoints. This has allowed for a deeper insight to what happened.

Just a thought,

Jim

[Justin]

Is there ANY bigwig publisher that's well liked?????

jafabian

Nope, not really. It's a pretty thankless job, I imagine. I don't envy those in the position in terms of being liked.

[Justin]

Nope, not really. It's a pretty thankless job, I imagine. I don't envy those in the position in terms of being liked.

Justin

Then again, I can't blame people too much as I tend to be skeptical about authority until proven otherwise. It's a good attitude to have, I feel. Dan ultimately comes off as too accommodating to me sometimes, but that's just me.

[Atom]

Did you all read the beginning of the Thursday DC panel at SDCC? He might have been faking it, but Dan read like he was trying to appease the people. You can read the transcript here: http://www.newsarama.com/comics/sdcc...ay-110721.html Is that along the lines of what you want? Or do you want more?

Jake1823

Alright - that was much better. I guess my only question is why it took 2-4 months for him to realize that he needed to say that. If I'd heard something along these lines up front - something that said I understand you - my negativity of things would have been much much less. Sure, I would have still disliked the change, especially since my favorite character is essentially being written out of the DCU (for now), but knowing that he's paying attention makes it somewhat easier to take.

I think the reason some fans (well, myself at least and I suspect others) got so negative and loud was that with no feedback from DC, we felt we weren't being heard. This is at least some recognition, which took far too long to emerge.

[handler313]

Wait... are handler313 and Justin the same person?

virtuadept

No...my name is Dave

[Atom]

No...my name is Dave

handler313

I'm either tired... or punch drunk... but now I can't get the Hal lines from 2001 out of my head... (what are you doing, Dave?)

And I'm heading to bed, and will likely dream parts of that movie - LOL!