I think it's easy for writers/creators to forget Superman isn't the greatest superhero because he's more powerful than anyone else.

He's the greatest because he's the first. Ever.

I still think Superman should obviously be extremely strong, and fly (I like the jumping bean Golden Age Superman myself, but that version won't be accepted). He uses heat vision RARELY, and hardly as an offensive weapon. His integrity is stronger than his heat vision. He can move, but he doesn't have Flash speed (that's just me...it kind of makes no sense for there to even be a Flash if Superman is just as fast or faster).

He has X-Ray vision, which he uses to "reveal" a truth. He has that advantage.

He has decades of fight experience, so he isn't some lame-o in pugilism. Okay, he can't beat Ali in some weird boxing match, but not many could. I get sick of Superman being portrayed as some lug when he doesn't have his powers, in comparison to better DCU martial fighters. He's should be well above above-average as a hand to hand combatant, superhuman or not.

He's also extremely intelligent. I get the idea that Superman, like Captain America, is an emotional thinker. But he's far from what Luthor would term a "musclebound moron". That's just idiot scripting. Clark Kent as a boy, a college kid, and a man should have the capability of learning much much faster. He should he versed in almost any known language and understand most philosophies and scientific theorums. He's not an adept, but he can get by better than Green Arrow or Wildcat, for sure.

If I was writing Superman, I'd establish a couple of ideas.

First, his mortal enemy is as strong or stronger than Superman. Be it Mongul or some other character designed for that purpose. I am sick...of...Luthor. Superman deserves a mortal enemy of real worth...Luthor is an annoying purveyor of the idea that Mankind distrusts the Man of Steel, and Luthor can use Clark's sense of responsibility against him. A mirror image enemy though, is one that shows Superman what he COULD be, if he was to have a mind. To take over, to rule the Earth, is not outside the realm of possibility. The mirror image enemy, Black Adam or Reverse-Flash or Ras Ah Ghul, should reveal so much more about our hero than even he can admit.

Second, Superman needs new characters to interact with. There's a world of characters both superhuman and not in need of the kind of ethical balance Superman provides. Maybe guidance, maybe even punishment. Why would some characters be drawn to a Superman, unless he could show them the best or worst inside themselves, perhaps even die by his hand and be martyred? It's well worth an exploration.

Lois and Perry and Jimmy, they're part of the status quo, they'll always be around. Get Superman around characters he's never been around before, or not for long.

As long as the stories are good, I don't really have a problem with a new interpretaion of a classic character. I loved Peter David's Hulk. I loved JB's Superman. I loved Mark Waid's Wally West Flash.

Of course, those three are all examples of examining an aspect or aspects of a classic character: What was the trauma that caused the Hulk's anger, let's get back to the Kansas farm boy, Max Mercury as a device to explain and explore where superspeed comes from.

Which leads to the question of "what's good?". This is a little like the debate of what "provide for the general welfare" means.

I agree with Lance and Michael, but it's one or the other.

The JSA were either around during WWII and are now gone or they "retired" 5 years before the new Flash appeared and slide time with the rest of the heroes.  Either option has its benefits, but you create more problems when you tie someone or a group to a specific time.

I think the real answer, again, lies in letting go of the past.  Our past.

I maintain that the original multiple earths idea was a good one and that it was handled well in the beginning.  I think where it went wrong was in establishing multiple versions of the big three or anyone who who was still being published.

I maintain that All-Star Squadron was a good idea then, at that time.  However, when the decision was made to publish Crisis on Infinite Earths, that book needed to go away.  Its time had passed.

I maintain that Crisis wasn't so bad an idea, just that it was poorly executed.

We should have had one world, post-crisis, and one version of each character.

Then, if it were decided later to return to the multiverse, that return would have to be handled under a new set of rules, not the old rules that we did away with in Crisis.

For examle, JB had a good idea about the original earths still existing after the crisis.  If this was the way we went back to the multiverse (and there are other ways too), then you must adress the time that has passed since the crisis.

That is, with All-Star Squadron no longer being published, you would not tie the Justcie Society to WWII.  No need to, the book is gone.  You would instead invoke the sliding time rule which was originally in effect when it aligned with WWII.

Then, on this other Earth (Earth-2?), there would be different versions of our heroes (older, wiser) for our heroes to interact with, but there would not be different versions of the big three, because we got rid of them and the problems they cause in the crisis.  Batman (earlier), Wonder Woman, Superman, and Superboy Prime were gone at the end of Crisis.  You don't bring them back and create the same problems you already solved.

Instead, you have, like I mentioned earlier, an earth with Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman and the Justice League, another with the Justice Society, another with the Fawcett heroes, another with the Quality heroes, another with the Charlton heroes, and another (I would assume) with the Marvel heroes.

For me, this is the right way to have an enjoyable, reasonable multiverse.  I maintain that this was the way it was originally conceived, for example, a JLA earth and a JSA earth, and a Marvel earth that knew about another universe where the heroes were copied to make the Squadron Sinister.

As much as I love 'em, the Squadron Supreme was a mistake, an unnecessary explanation.

I know this seems like a lot of rules, but this is not about rules.  This is about doing away with the rules that mess things up.

As far as I am concerned, the only continuity that matters or that should exist is to be contained within a title, and even then it can evolve slowly over time.

JB's Doom Patrol is the perfect example.  A new title gets a new set of the rules.  If the old rules were so important, then the title would never have been cancelled in the first place.

I need a break.  I hope I made myself clear, that is I hope that you understand what I am saying.  This half-assed approach we are used to never seems to work.

'Nuff said!