Me lurking in this thread over the last two days:

 

I think that, while you're right this distinction exists, it isn't necessarily the test of whether a criticism is personal or not. Identity is somewhat interwoven with opinion - it's hard to say "The idea of an all-powerful creator is really dumb" without implying that people who believe that are also really dumb. And a problem we have on these forums is that it's hard to completely separate a savagely negative opinion on a story from a negative opinion on those who enjoyed it. So we're already in the arena of the personal, and while it's possible for some comments to be way over the line, I think what you're highlighting here is sometimes a distinction without a difference.

What I mean is: if someone posts a screed about the comic being dogshit targeted at whiny Tumblr-ites, Roberts being a waste of space and so on, and someone else replies, "You're an idiot", I'm firmly of the opinion that the first post was the one that broke etiquette, and the second is an understandably irritated reaction.

OK, my suggestion would be that there's more than one sense of the word 'opinion'. You're right that it can be used to mean any kind of inkling of a feeling someone might have about anything. But in some contexts, it also implies a perspective - that you are, as it were, "speaking personally", speaking for yourself. In that sense, opinion excludes speculation about factual matters. If I am asked my opinion on a political leader, for example, I would be misunderstanding the question if I started pontificating about how they liked their eggs cooked or what size shoes they wear.

 

I guess it's just a difference in how we would approach the situation. Personally, I'd write something like 'hot take' or 'Wow, that's a GREAT opinion' (sarcastically). I don't think it serves any purpose to just attack someone, especially on a board where we should try to get along or, minimum, remain civil.

Especially if we have to make sure to not break forum rules. Calling someone an idiot breaks those rules. Now enforcing those rules is based on the subjective opinion of the mod that is able to see the violation (I think we saw a lot of lopsided judgements being made around here for a while). I guess my biggest bone of contention with this entire situation is the way the insult shuts down the conversation. A lot of people asked AA to elaborate on his idea as a means to trying to understand his point of view. There was only one person who was name calling and trying to shut down the conversation.

Oh, and when does it change from being critical to turning into a dog-piling situation?

Let's take it a step further. If this were the real world, and we were all sitting in a room speaking to each other face to face, do you think calling someone an idiot couldn't end up with you picking your teeth up off the ground? Personally, I try to talk to you all the way I would if we were in the same room because I don't want to risk messing up my pretty face.

I guess that's why I try my best to remain civil with people up to a point. Eventually it gets to a point where I will, as has been said, start to shovel shit, but I try to remain civil with people as I view that everyone here deserves a modicum of respect because we're all people here, regardless of our silly opinions.

... Yea, I guess I really am a low rent Atticus Finch, lmao.

 

Atticus Finch was a standup dude. I wouldn’t mind being Atticus Finch.

 

I agree, and I do try not to jump in with ad hominem attacks because it mostly doesn't help the situation. But I also think it's worth granting some leeway considering people might be, say, having a bad day or have just come from another ill-tempered thread - or if they're in a situation where the other person could be said to have crossed a line first. So working with your hypothetical below -

- calling someone an idiot in a conversation in the real world is usually a point reached after two or more people have already rubbed each other up the wrong way. The person reaching for the epithet 'idiot' is probably deeply offended in some way. That means something has already gone wrong. You then have to ask: "OK, how did it reach this point and how do we stop it happening again? Because the next stage might well be a punch-up." And I would suggest that if, in the course of the preceding conversation, someone has been dissing another person's hobby or friend or favourite thing quite continuously and aggressively, that's the real source of your fire.

To put it another way, with a personal twist: I'm unlucky enough to move in some social circles where there are quite a few things that happen to be very popular which I happen to think are pretty shite. I'm confident I can back my opinion up with good reasons, and sometimes I just want to shake people and say: "How can you possibly like/defend this thing?" But if I was persistent in savagely rubbishing it in front of these others, I would be (a) forcing them to go on the defensive constantly, which is not something a lot of people find pleasant, and (b) probably earning myself some form of excommunication in short order. I'm not really sure it would be out of order for one of them to react by calling me an idiot, assuming I keep it up.

I'm not drawing a comparison with anything anyone has specifically done on this thread, but there are quite a few people who drop by this forum in particular, it seems, to do very little other than repeatedly go on about how bad IDW/MTMTE/Roberts/Barber is, and that is going to lead to some frayed tempers.

 

Is that some self awareness I see? Well I would be remiss not to respond fairly and in kind.

As me mammy always said it takes two to tango, so i can certainly cop to my share of cuntly behaviour and the ensuing shitshow. It sure did get ugly there, I even reported one of my own posts in order to get this whole mess shutdown! I will make a single clarification however, which is that i strongly feel that the only person I've really taken my time to rake over the coals has been you, dear GoLion, my belief in provocation or no. That said, i feel absolutely confident in being able to acquit the level of deportment you've outlined above going forward.

So here's me, extending the hand of friendship, offering truce, tryna bury the hatchet.

Yours truly
Pluto.
xoxoxox

 

I think I remember a quote from musicians/writer Nick Cave in the documentary film about him 10,000 days on earth when he said words to the affect that all of the characters he writes about are twisted and distorted versions of himself and in my opinion to write well all characters are kind of self insert characters so it’s more about whether Rung is an interesting and good one or not.

Rung’s greatest strength in this area is that he doesn’t talk too much and only occasionally takes centre stage in the storyline as it could have ended up pretty cheesy if Rung had given loads of long protracted speeches in which the storyline was putting pressure on the viewer to agree with the speech as an absolute moral ‘correct’ point of view.

I think the Rung/Primus thing is easily the most interesting thing to do with Primus in any transformers story as there is loads fascinating stuff like the most religious Primus fearing types the functionists unknowingly torturing their own god for millions of years and it would have been really interesting to see Star Sabers reaction but sadly it was never to be. It’s also quite an eccentric and unpredictable take on the whole god walking the earth thing.

Edit just had a read some of this thread after posting and the gosh the comic forums have certainly changed quite a bit in my absence.

 

Hey, if you're being serious that you won't attack people for disagreeing with you, then I am more than happy to 'bury the hatchet'. I think the majority of your posts are pretty spot on (when you're not attacking people), so I think it's great that you acknowledge what you were doing and that you should stop doing it. I appreciate that you're showing this level of maturity.

 

I think its fairly important to point out that this is a two way street mind you, and that as you've articulated there are times when it is perfectly appropriate (but not altogether justified perhaps) to let slip the dogs of war. But i shall exercise my judgement in those matters as I expect you to do same. Otherwise, the contract is sealed.

 

^

I for one, rest easy tonight knowing that the eventual result of James Roberts’ rampant narcissism* given prose form is that we all got along.

Just like Ratchet’s grave said... “Without love, nothing matters”. What a fitting epitaph for this series it turned out to be!  

 

I think since primus has an avatar unicron must have one too.my hypothisis is kaon, hear me out. They both have no eyes. They both "died" by having their head seperated from their body, perhaps tarn knew who kaon really was so he smashed his head rather than just seperating it knowing it didnt kill him last time. Both are very chaotic and violent in nature. Maby im onto somthing maby im not.

 

It's probably easier and safer for a writer to make their own character a god in their own story, rather than pick an established one for the role. Though it runs the risk of looking (or maybe being) rather egocentric.

Of course, Shockwave as Onyx Prime was quite a move too from John Barber.

In the end, with this sort of thing it all comes down to your own opinion.

 

You're probably not.

 

"Avatar of Unicron" is one of the upper theories for whatever the hell is going on with Sideways, so if anyone's getting it, its probably that ol' scramp.

Notice how he also didn't turn up in the series due to the nature of Primus and Unicron in this universe not being creator/destroyer

 

I felt neutral at Rung being Primus.

 

What is the final fate of Rung in the comic? Does he just die? Does anyone find out he is Primus?

 

He dies and the group he is with finds out he is Primus, for a time anyway.

 

Spoiler: The Fate Of Rung

The central cast of the Lost Light finds out he's Primus.

Rung sacrifices himself to make a bunch of matrices that are absolutely necessary to defeat Functionist "Primus", a giant transforming Cybertron from another timeline formed by the ruling theocracy as part of their general gambit towards Universal Superiority. Not to put too fine a point on it, he burns himself into ash making the matrices - either because they're formed whole cloth from his own body or something else. Can't recall. Read whatever Judeo-Christian over/undertones you like in there.

The matrices made are used to overload Cybertron, with the excess power being blasted at one of Cyberton's moons, which re-ignites that moon's hot spots. The inference is that the subsequent Transformers birthed on that moon kind of look like Rung and share his odd propensity to be difficult to remember/place/identify/tell apart/whatever.

 

My explanation was satisfactory!

 

He was just elaborating, man.

As to the original thread question, my reaction was basically "Really, Roberts? Really? You made your self-insert into the Transformers' deity, then demoted that deity to just an old bot?" Yeah, I'm not a fan.

Rung by himself is okay, but this particular bit needs to be excised like Torkulon.