Sorry. Just paranoid, I guess.

I would hope that this is all truthful (and in that case, I do sincerely offer my condolences), but given what's happened in the past around here, it's hard sometimes not to be suspicious.

Dave Phelps wrote: …Wolverine ...should be left largely unchanged…  JB wrote: Which Wolverine?

 

I was just thinking again this morning about how Wolverine changed over the years. I liked (not admired, but liked) the version of Wolverine from JB's era on "The Uncanny X-Men," where the character was a psychotic, loner nutball who was with the X-Men in part to help him suppress and cure his psychotic tendencies. It made for a (at that time) unique and interesting dynamic when contrasted with the other members of the team.

Starting with the "Wolverine" mini-series, I feel that the character changed drastically, developing into some uber-macho, arrogant, cocky, unbeatable, know-it-all, smart-ass thug. I just didn't care for that take. Even though the earlier version was a nut, he was more sympathetic in that he was trying to control his wild side. The later Wolverine was/is just a jerk.

Edited to add:

Oh! And while the newer version of Wolverine still claimed to be a loner, at times, he seems to have met and/or befriended nearly every Marvel character (at least any halfway connected to an arm of the military) during his past.

To Greg Kirkman:

I know you idolize Mr. Byrne and all but could you please stop being his lapdog. I see this with fans on this board who do a complete turnaround on a subject or they wait until Mr. Byrne gives his opinion on something and then post so they choose the same side as him. Its very pathetic. 

Its like that kid on the Twilight Zone movie who had unlimited superpowers so the people that lived with him were afraid to express any opinion other than what the kid said.

I'm sure that Mr. Byrne doesn't want people who just agree with everything he says. Otherwise, it would be a pretty boring board.

Kirkman, you quietly give your condolences. Then Byrne speaks up with a differing opinion and then you feel all brave and start speaking out against this guy.

Show some balls next time. Post your controversial opinion BEFORE Byrne posts.  

What point, Greg? That we should blindly accept whatever comes across
the internet?

++++++++

That I should try to look before I leap.

It's just not worth the effort to argue about this stuff. I think I'd rather keep my mouth shut about any suspicions I might have instead of inviting everyone to dog-pile on (which I apparently just did).

I found it bizarre, and yes--convenient--that this gent posted about his mother dying in the manner that he did. Suddenly, after pages of arguing and being called obtuse, he gets a flood of people offering condolences for his loss.

I must reiterate that I do sincerely offer my condolences if there really was a death in the familiy. But the fact remains that my spider-sense tingled. People have used such tricks to try to create a climate of distrust and anger around here before.

At first, I offered my condolences, despite my silent suspicion. JB then opened the door on voicing some suspicion, and I walked through it, since the matter was now clearly open for discussion. And then a guy who signed up with the forum three days ago was kind enough to take me to task for it.

I feel badly that this has all happened in this manner. Is that not good enough?