Hopefully if we are getting #6 next week, SLG will update their site this week. I'm pretty confident the Greg W. will have the queue this week too hopefully ready for next week's release. Cross your fingers!

See you all tomorrow morning after the top 10.
TiniTinyTony - [tinitinytony at hotmail dot com]
"What you're passionate about, from a cartoon standpoint, has to do with what age you were when you very first saw it." ~Greg Weisman
posted @ Sun, Sep 9, 2007 11:01:12 pm EDT from 71.181.210.50

Kris - http://www.s8.org/gargoyles/askgreg/search.php?rid=505 is where you can find the current schedule.
dph_of_rules
Whatever happenned to simplicity?
posted @ Sun, Sep 9, 2007 3:32:05 pm EDT from 71.29.245.38

Kris> The schedule was thrown off so long ago, it's best not to worry about it.

#3 came out in March
#4 May
#5 July
#6 September

... Yes, we're still on what is now the proper schedule. Plus, we'll have the Bad Guys comic.
Greg Bishansky - [<---- The 12th Annual Gathering of the Gargoyles]
"Never hate your enemies. It clouds your judgement." - Michael Corleone.
posted @ Sun, Sep 9, 2007 1:29:38 pm EDT from 67.87.175.245

Hey Todd, thanks for the info. But I'm pretty sure Gargoyles #6 was originally due out in July and #7 this month. Since Gargoyles #8 was just solicited for pre-orders in the most recent issue of Previews, I assumed it would be due out in November, since comics that are pre-ordered now are usually meant to arrive in two months.

I guess the lateness (or Disney holding it up or whatever) has messed things up a bit. Have you guys heard from Greg on the subject recently ? If he was the one who stated that #6 will now be out this month and #7 in November, sorry for the confusion, I wasn't around to read that. I guess in that case I should assume that #8 will be out in January or maybe December if we're lucky.

I'm not impatient or anything, not a stickler for books coming out exactly when the ads say they will, just wanting to make sure I don't miss any issues and somewhat keep up with the status of the comic.
Kris - [plekopleko at hotmail dot com]
posted @ Sun, Sep 9, 2007 11:22:11 am EDT from 24.137.192.172

This'll be the last I say on this subject. If someone else wants a parting shot, I won't object, but I don't want this spilling over into next week. We've gone far afield, and when the room wipes, we should probably get back on topic.

And let the record show that I was trying to have a reasoned, intelligent discussion and was accused of being a "fear-monger." This is why I get uncomfortable arguing about politics online.

Basically what I'm hearing is, "public schools have problems. If we make them more like corporations, the problems will go away." I don't see why that would be the case. I'd think recent scandals like Enron and Walter Reed have proven that, while government may be inefficient at times, corporations' very efficiency often leads them to deliberately hurting the customers in an attempt to raise the bottom line. You talk about schools being paralyzed by the threat of lawsuits, but I don't see why a profit model would be any less restrictive. Can't you already hear a principal saying "don't suspend that kid- he's got four siblings in school! What if they all pull out?" Thinking about the bottom line may work for producing quality widgets, but it's very different when you're dealing with real people. It leads to a mindset where the students are expendable commodities. Students who will probably do poorly on standardized tests are expelled or transferred to pull up the class average. If they were forced to stay in the school, the teachers don't have the option of giving up on them. There are students who fall through the cracks, yes, but teachers aren't encouraged to get rid of them, as they would be under a profit model. As I said, when they're competing for students, schools focus on looking good, not on being good. Corporate ethos is to raise the bottom line at all costs, and the bottom line usually is measured by test scores. But I can't see deciding a child's future based on a test created and scored by people who've never even met the child. Some people complain about tests being bad and try to make them better, but a nationally standardized test or even a statewide one can't possibly reflect real education. Answering multiple choice questions about the slopes of linear equations does not mean students truly understand how a graph represents rate of change. Knowing the names of the various generals and politicians in the Civil War does not mean students understand why secession occurred or can judge the right or wrong of it. It's almost impossible for these tests to truly measure depth of understanding, and even if they can, with essay questions and such, even good students have some areas they're weak in. But the test-makers will probably hit on those areas. Most such tests would only have a couple essay questions, and there's no way they can all be covered in depth in one year. And so depth is sacrificed in a frantic attempt to cover everything. The school year touches on many different subjects, but the list of standards is usually so long and specific that there's no time for students to explore their own ideas about things. They just race from one subject to the next. This is the sort of thing that happens, and it's not "fear-mongering." Many strong veteran teachers have left the profession rather than be forced to jump through these absurd hoops. They knew how to teach through years of experience, and politicians who've probably not been in a class since they graduated told them, "no, you don't. Do it our way." There was an argument that, since politicians send their kids to private schools, everyone should have the same option. I think that fact is a better argument for parents of students in public schools to get involved and not leave education to people with no vested interest. The same could be said of not simply allowing politicians with no children in the armed forces to start wars. The people need to demand meaningful change, not solutions that sound good but just turn education into an endless rat race. And that's what it would be. Running to raise test scores only hurts genuine education, so more students pull out of school, which reduces funding and only worsens education, causing even more students to pull out.

L.T. Williams, you had a lot of good stuff to say, particularly that bit about economies of scale. I'd known vouchers were too small to afford a full private education, but I hadn't figured out why that was until you spelled it out for me. You ask what the solution is. I admit that I don't have a silver bullet, but that's because I don't think that there is a national solution. I think solutions will have to be local in nature. What works in Vermont may not work in Los Angeles. Departments of Education have a purpose in making sure that funds are appropriated fairly- why not give more money to the schools that need it, rather than those that are already doing well? They can also help improve quality of teachers, but that should be approached from the perspective of working with teachers to do better, rather than threatening them. Ultimately, though, the only way things get better is if the people in the community get involved and are free to make their own decisions. You say that money won't solve all the problems, and you're absolutely right. The problem with the competitive model is that it encourages teachers and administrators to think only about money. It sets school against school and teacher against parent, in the worst cases. Rather than cooperate, everyone's just out for themselves. Parents threaten teachers to get their way, rather than coming together to improve education for all. We want everyone to be in the same boat on this issue. If the people at the local level are able to work together to solve the problems that their students have without having to worry about funding being pulled, then things are bound to get better.

Anyone who wants to learn more about this, I'd encourage reading The Schools Our Children Deserve, by Alfie Kohn. He's a very opinionated writer on education, and other issues to a lesser extent, but his opinions are backed up with mounds of research. Click my name to go to his website, where you can read a number of articles for free. I'd especially suggest "School Choice Myths" and "Test Today, Privatize Tomorrow." Keep looking for answers, everyone- that's the only way things get better.
Jurgan - [jurgan6 at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Sun, Sep 9, 2007 10:39:52 am EDT from 68.59.13.169

Tron is a great movie, it is one of a kind (the only movie to use the animation techniques it used).

I was severly disapointed by the video game (there's also Tron Killer App for XBox360 and GBA), in my opionion it was lacking in the story department and the extremly long load times where more than annoying (miss jump - die - reload - miss jump - die - reload and repeat). Graphic wise it wasn't all that great, but than I normal play things like Final Fantasy with pre-rendered cutscenes, Tron had only ingame cutscenes. And, well, the title character, Tron, was only mentioned and never even shown again.

I don't know, what to make of the comic, it doesn't have Tron, it is a weird psycho story, the graphic style isn't really my cup of coffee and it takes very long for new issues to come out. You don't really get to see all the wonders of the digital domain in those interesting graphics which made the original Tron so interesting.

Personally, I prefer the Tron world in Kingdom Hearts 2, it has Tron and it has some of the wonder of movie, the light cycle races are a bit different from those one is wont from everything named Tron. The GBA game is relative good, too, though a bit on the short side and it comes with a bunch of fun little mini games.
Anonymous
posted @ Sun, Sep 9, 2007 9:44:00 am EDT from 84.184.121.176

KRIS - No, #6 is supposed to be out this month, and #7 in November. I think you've gotten a little mixed up.
Todd Jensen
Gargoyles - did for monstrous-looking statues what "Watership Down" did for rabbits!
posted @ Sun, Sep 9, 2007 8:06:10 am EDT from 4.244.213.25

Apologies for the double-posting, but I forgot that I wanted to ask about the other SLG comics and what folks thought of 'em.

I was curious about TRON 'cause I liked the art style when it was first being advertised. I've never seen the film, but was thinking of maybe finally watching it 'cause I'd seen a trailer for the video game from a while back (I think it was called "Tron 2.0") and thought that looked cool. Planning on getting the trade paperback collection if SLG releases one.

Haunted Mansion didn't look like my sorta thing. Gave it a pass.

I picked up the first issue of Wonderland and it was, y'know, not bad. I loved the art style, but the whimsical (naturally) story just felt too lightweight, not enough meat to it, to keep me sustained from release to bi-monthly release. I see some folks are surprised (or skeptical) to learn that it was intended as a mini-series, but I could've sworn I heard/read "6 issues" back when it started.
Kris - [plekopleko at hotmail dot com]
posted @ Sun, Sep 9, 2007 7:11:25 am EDT from 24.137.192.172

"I haven't done an exact count, but I think Angela holds the record for number of episodes where she gets tied up or otherwise restrained. I suppose that earns her the April O'Neil Award. ;)"

Heh, found that amusing since I've been going through a friend's DVDs of the original Turtles cartoon and she does get used as a plot device in that fashion a whole lot (Volumes 1 to 5, which I think covers Seasons 1 to 3. Thankfully they decided to go with whole season sets starting with Season 4). I like the original Turtles cartoon--I know it isn't close to the spirit of the original comic and I've seen some of the 2003 series, it's lightyears better...but the original still has a cheesy charm to it, it doesn't require a whole lotta brain power so it's good to fall asleep to at the end of the day, and once in a blue moon it turns out a standout episode.

Re: the Slave Labor Graphics Disney comics

Was going through the most recent Previews catalogue yesterday, filling out the order form for the few monthly issues I continue to buy and gifting myself with the odd TPB or testing out a new indie comic...was VERY relieved to see Gargoyles #8 solicited. However, since #6 was due out in July and #7 is supposed to be this month, how does that work when everything finally catches up ? Would SLG allow two issues to be released in the same month, or would they stagger their Gargoyles output in case there're any delays with issue #8 and beyond ?

Do we have any exact sales figures on the comic, any word on how well it's doing ? You don't see it in the Top 100 and I wouldn't expect to among all the Marvel, DC, and Dark Horse titles that dominate that list, but the fact that they went to a second (and third?) printing with issue #1 was real promising.

Sorry if I'm repeating comic questions, life's been too crazy to follow pretty much any of my online fandoms.
Kris - [plekopleko at hotmail dot com]
posted @ Sun, Sep 9, 2007 7:05:18 am EDT from 24.137.192.172

Marty - I find most of the objections to your argument to be thoroughly unconvincing... and yet, I find your argument to be almost equally naive.

Let's not pretend that currently their are enough options (private, parochial, religious, charter, whatever, etc) already in existence to service all the kids in this nation. So once we dismantle (or gut) the public school system with vouchers or some equivalent, where do these kids go? Perhaps this is only an issue of transition. We bite the bullet. Know there are going to be a few bad years. But count on competition to solve the problem eventually. Ahh, but there's the rub, right?

There are plenty of neighborhoods scattered all over our country where "competition" has dictated that it is not an economically sound decision to put a bank branch, to put a movie theater... to put a super-market. Everyone needs food, and yet... hey! No super-market for them. So how can we assure that every neighborhood gets the way more complex problem of having a school?

I know you're not saying this literally, but you argue as if ONLY public schools are subject to the paranoia and fear and bull associated with lawsuits, protests, politics etc. But I'm sure you know as well as I that that's far from true. And would be even less true if there were no true public school system. Of course, liability issues are huge for private schools even now. Insurance bills are massive, particularly when there are no economics of scale attached to help mitigate the premiums.

And economics of scale are of course a huge part of every aspect of the problem. Let's say we offer vouchers. Give people more choice. It certainly benefits a greater quantity of people. But now the VERY POOREST, or so it seems to me, are truly screwed. Few options, and even if they choose to stay put... well, most of the money in the school system has been reallocated to the "choice" schools, so on top of every other problem, you now have zero money. You talk about public schools that have thrown money at the problem and still haven't solved it. Granted. Granted. Granted. Wanna see a worse scenario? Give them no money at all, or rather so little that it might as well be none.

Because of course the "voucher" is not enough to pay for the education in a vaccuum. It's flat out not enough money. OUR TAXES, high as they are, do not provide enough money to INDIVIDUALLY educate our entire young populace. It's only with economics of scale that this becomes even vaguely possible. (Again, or so it seems to me.)

So what's MY solution? Hey... I have NONE. I'm willing to admit that I can't crack this nut. I'm not saying your wrong, even. But I don't see how your version works. I just don't get it. It seems great in theory... just as -- as an ideal -- public school for all seems great in theory. But in practice... and here's where I totally agree with you, it's all very dependent on parents.

A school with little money can still be a fantastic school with both parental participation and parental support of what -- for lack of a better term -- I'll call the "Education Ethic". A school with a ton of money can be worthless if parents neither participate nor support the program.

Maybe what we need is mandatory parental education?! Yeah, yeah. Another nightmare.

(And don't even get me started on regulation. We can't even regulate our ports, our meat industry, our spinach. So yeah, how can we expect our government to regulate private schools when they've done such a lousy job regulating public schools? Well, here's the alternative: ask the parents to regulate, right? Yeah, right. How can inexperienced parents be expected to regulate schools on their own? I'm all for trusting parents, but as a parent myself, let me SCREAM: "I WANT HELP! I CAN'T EVEN THINK OF ALL THE QUESTIONS TO ASK! DON'T JUST LEAVE THIS TOTALLY UP TO MY JUDGMENT!" And I say that having been a teacher (at both public and private universities) for years.)

I'm eager to have you convince me. Really. I want to be open-minded, and I'd like to believe that what you're suggesting would work. It clearly would help MORE people than the current system, but I just don't see how we wouldn't go from screwing over the most needy to COMPLETELY screwing over the most needy. If those are the only two options, then frankly I'll opt to stay with the crappy system we have until someone much smarter than I can finally come up with something that would actually work.
L.T. Williams
Usually a lurker...
posted @ Sun, Sep 9, 2007 5:12:10 am EDT from 68.183.95.134

Sorry for this complete change of topic, but I was wondering if anyone had heard anything about Keith David's CD. Has it come out yet? Is it delayed? Is it a dead deal? He was quite excited about it at the Los Angeles gathering and talked to me about it at length--including some of the songs he wanted to include. It sounded great, but I can't find reference to it anywhere. Anybody?
oneuke
posted @ Sun, Sep 9, 2007 12:59:59 am EDT from 69.3.118.77

Ozzie Arcane> Thank you. Yeah I got buried trying to change the subject. Oh well. No biggie.
TiniTinyTony - [tinitinytony at hotmail dot com]
"What you're passionate about, from a cartoon standpoint, has to do with what age you were when you very first saw it." ~Greg Weisman
posted @ Sat, Sep 8, 2007 11:53:55 pm EDT from 71.173.11.129

Demon@ - I think there's one thing we all agree on: the general public (not just the parents of the children) paying for the education of the children. The question we disagree on is what happens to that money: whether parents should be able to take their child's share of that money to pay for private schools.

Marty Lund - I've heard stories about the problems with teacher unions in my state's capital from would-be teachers.
dph_of_rules
Whatever happenned to simplicity?
posted @ Sat, Sep 8, 2007 11:35:15 pm EDT from 151.213.143.117

I said these and I say it again: both options are the best alternative Why? Because not all people thinks public school is the best and not all people think private school is.
We shoudnt be asking whats better, if private or public, but why is public a bad option and why private school is a bad option and work to fix that.
Its naive, I know, to think that the world will suddenly start to think in solutions about the present matters and existing issues instead of wanting to change the whole system because a little failure and think these new system wont also have new failures...but well, thats only me.
I would also choose Demona, by the way. And I do agree on the clawed face off too.
Demon@
posted @ Sat, Sep 8, 2007 11:22:40 pm EDT from 24.232.30.78

Poor TiniTinyTony, his post got completely drowned out by all that talk about schools. As long as she wouldn't claw my face off, my choice would be Demona.

On the topic of public schools, I'll stay out of this debate but I'll share an ineteresting little story. A school near here had a deal with a food company to supply the food for their cafeteria, but they changed their mind after they already signed the contract. So now the city that school is in has an additional tax to pay this food company for a food deal that the school chose not to use while still having to pay for the food company they are using. Lovely how poorly some schooles are run these days eh?
Ozzie Arcane - [ozziearcane at yahoo dot com]
"Hello Booby! This is a trap!" - Eggplant Wizard
posted @ Sat, Sep 8, 2007 10:56:19 pm EDT from 69.14.122.91

HoE: hahahaha
Demon@
posted @ Sat, Sep 8, 2007 6:44:10 pm EDT from 190.2.14.84

Sorry for the double post but anyone know where I can find a Gargoyles layout I can use for my Myspace page.
Vicky82 - [Vickyfanofwwe at aol dot com]
posted @ Sat, Sep 8, 2007 6:12:33 pm EDT from 195.93.21.4

Hi just to say I'm on myspace if anyone wants a peak. i got a tiny bit of Gargoyles on it. myspace.com/sweetandinnocentvicky
Vicky82 - [Vickyfanofwwe at aol dot com]
posted @ Sat, Sep 8, 2007 5:27:12 pm EDT from 195.93.21.4

See, these are perfect examples of the kind of misguided arguments the anti-school-choice establishment fear-mongers all over the place.

My father went to an elective school. It was called Boston Latin School. It was a publically funded city school that was voluntary enrollment. It had high academic and behavioral standards. Kids got expelled all the time. Some parents didn't want to bother with the effort. Those people didn't stick around too long. Latin School produced amazing results and it was completely secular.

Me, I went to public school, non-religious private school, and parochial school all in my educational career. The schools where all the parents were bound by their willful choice to enroll their students all had excellent environments.

"Willful choice," and "environment," are the two key factors in education that school choice addresses.

Choices are important because they imply responsibility. When a parent complains that little Johny can't read because the public school the Government has forced them to enroll in sucks they get a "That's too bad," and a sympathetic nod for being a victim. When a parent complains that little Johny can't write because the competitive school he or she decided to enroll Johny at sucks they get a, "Why don't you choose somewhere better than?" onus put on their shoulders.

Yes, parents can make bad choices - but that's the parent's responsibility. The elephant in the room that no one likes to talk about but is impossible to miss in a classroom environment when you get your hands dirty is this: bad choices by parents have the power to undermine the whole education process - period. There's no magic power the Teacher, Administrator, or Politician can conjure up that can sufficiently mitigate a screwed up home. If parents don't reinforce what the classroom tries to teach then the child's education suffers. If parents contradict and set poor examples for children at home, they bring those problems into the classroom.

What's more, it isn't just their kid they screw over. This is part of the "environment" factor. It causes splash damage in the classroom too - hurting the education of other students. At least with voluntary enrollment it is easier to hold parents accountable when their poor examples at home cause their child to be overly disruptive in the classroom.

In competitive schooling you've made a choice and you stick by an agreement as to what responsibilities you carry as a parent. In public schools you get to blame everyone else and call a lawyer. Due to the voluntary nature of competitive schooling, private administrators can reserve greater room for individual teaching styles, specialized programs, and innovative teaching methods. In Government Entitlement Schooling everything is straight-jacketed to avoid a lawsuit.

It isn't that public school teachers are any less passionate, but rather than a lawsuit-happy government monopoly environment does not ~ empower ~ teachers enough to give children the educational environments they deserve, nor does it place the onus of personal responsibility squarely enough on parents to hold up their end of the bargain.

Yeah, sometimes the competitive difference between schools in an area won't matter enough for some parents to scrutinize them too closely. They may just pick the school that's easier to get to. However, judging by the number of people stuck in failing inner-city schools clamoring for the funds to send their kids to private education, choice is extremely important as a fail-safe for the under-privileged.

Just because a handful of parents aren't going to do their jobs doesn't mean everyone needs to have their choices and voices taken away.
Marty Lund - [kaioto at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Sat, Sep 8, 2007 1:16:10 am EDT from 72.208.137.128

Vaevictis Asmadi - <All I'm going to say on this matter is that I do NOT want to live in a country where only the rich can afford to send their children to school, and where the only schools are religious schools which pressure students to convert.> Nobody's arguing that, but what some of us want is a choice. Collectively, people in an area pay milleage taxes (property taxes) to pay for education. What we want is those dollars be used to give students a choice. <As a member of a minority religion, I hold my freedom to believe without being harrassed about it VERY dearly.> Absolutely true. Nobody should be harassed about his/her religion unless the religion involves human sacrifice.
dph_of_rules
Whatever happenned to simplicity?
posted @ Sat, Sep 8, 2007 12:14:26 am EDT from 71.29.241.36

I also support public schools because I am not a mainstream religion. I am Wiccan. And though I am raising my daughter to be agnostic (I believe in allowing her to choose her path), I don't want outside influence on her other than what I approve in my own home. I believe in evolution.

Now I know there are non-religious private schools. None local to me, but there is such a thing. The kids get a higher education than what they would do normally in public schools. My daughter is almost 9 and in the 3rd grade and she has 8th grade reading level and 5th grade math level. The public school she attends has fantastic gifted and honored classrooms to keep giving her challenges so she doesn't get bored. So I am very happy with the public school system here. She's been in it since K and has no problem and is so far ahead she amazes a lot of people. So the stereotype that public schools don't create highly intelligent children is just that, a stereotype. I really don't need to pay a tuition at age 9 to keep giving her a higher education.
Siren
Don't knock on Death's door. Ring his doorbell and run, he hates that.
posted @ Sat, Sep 8, 2007 12:12:27 am EDT from 68.202.76.113

All I'm going to say on this matter is that I do NOT want to live in a country where only the rich can afford to send their children to school, and where the only schools are religious schools which pressure students to convert. As a member of a minority religion, I hold my freedom to believe without being harrassed about it VERY dearly.

Therefore, I will support the continued existence of public schools until the day I die.
Vaevictis Asmadi
"For every complex problem, there is a solution which is simple, easy, and wrong.
posted @ Fri, Sep 7, 2007 11:56:26 pm EDT from 71.34.62.217

*comes awake suddenly, brandishing a switchblade.*

DON'T TOUCH MY STUFF!

*looks around confused*

Hey, this isn't the YMCA.

*goes back to sleep*
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75 at gmail dot com]
"You know, you and my mother, you're like two peas in a pod. She can't use a phone, either, but she's seventy years old. What's your f**king excuse?" -Tony Soprano
posted @ Fri, Sep 7, 2007 8:50:47 pm EDT from 71.62.204.109

Jurgan >> Sorry, but I'm not buying it. That's the same sorry line the Teacher's Union and the Socialists have rolled out for decades now. It is just a deceitful smoke-screen to obfuscate two ugly truthes:

- Monopolies don't have to earn their income or position in the market by providing a quality service and a reasonable price.

- Public Schools are a "closed shop," so the Teacher's Union collects dues and influence off of every teacher employed in Public Schools - but not in Competitive Schools.

My father was a teacher. My wife is a teacher. I helped put her through college for education and saw the twisted mentality of those who call themselves "gatekeepers" of the education establishment. Their venom towards charter, private, and exam schools was as disturbing as their arguments were irrational. All it really came down to was "the Spice must flow," where in this case Spice is taxpayer dollars.

If you want to see what the Union Line solution to Public Education is (more money, more teachers, more government, less choice) look at Washington DC's public schools - where they drop way more money per student than many more successful schools. The system itself is worthlessly corrupt and no longer exists to benefit students. The argument that the State knows better than the Parent as to where the money should go to educate their child is especially disturbing, by the way. By the same argument all well-fair and WIC programs should justify the state subsuming the responsibility of parents with state-run orphanages and the like for everyone - even those who aren't screw-ups. I don't think we want to go there.

Competitive Education works. That's why people with the resources exercise School Choice and the only people forced to endure this "better, more fair system" of Public Schools are those with less means. They aren't sending their kids to private schools because they "look better." They are sending their kids to competitive schools because they ~ are ~ better That doesn't mean that every choice every parent makes is going to be right, but it means that the people with the means and information to make good choices acknowledge that there are better choices out there right now.

My father was a passionate educator, but eventually had to quit. The only place he could make a living to support his family was public schools. The reason he left was because he wasn't allowed adequate latitude to actually teach in public schools. Why? Because of the Politics. It wasn't that teachers didn't care about teaching, but because the Administration and the Union kept teachers in straight-jackets. Everyone's afraid of lawsuits, or political backlash. Give the football star the F he earned and the PTA is going to try to oust someone, etc.

And that's caused because attending any particular public school is not seen as a privilege or a choice, but a right that comes with no real obligations or responsibilities resting on the Students or Parents.

The classic example is classroom discipline. Discipline is a laughing-stock in poorly performing public schools, hands down. Who makes disciplinary decisions? Not the teachers, but the government bureaucrats. Why can't discipline be maintained? It has nothing to do with budget and everything to do with the fact that parents and students aren't expected to agree to any concrete standards upon enrollment. They suffer from Entitlement Mentality and they don't just hurt themselves, they cause all the other students to suffer for it.

No, competition between schools where parents vote with education funding is by far the better alternative to a stagnant bureaucratic mess that currently exists only to generate manipulate the under-class and line the pockets of corrupt unions.
Marty Lund - [kaioto at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Fri, Sep 7, 2007 8:08:46 pm EDT from 67.128.112.166

As a soon-to-be teacher, this is a very important issue to me, but I'll try to be civil about it.

The problem with assuming that competition improves productivity is that it assumes that people will not do anything unless they're forced to. People need money, so they get jobs, and they work hard to keep their jobs in order to keep getting money. Sounds good, and there's some truth to it, but it overlooks one vital point: The best workers are always those who genuinely enjoy their work, not those who are doing it for money (there's a wealth of evidence to support this, and I could start rattling off studies, but I won't unless asked, because it'll just clutter things up). Even in menial jobs that are pure gruntwork, there are ways to make it more enjoyable. When I worked at Hardee's, I was respected by my employers and coworkers, given a chance to do several different jobs on different days, and got to interact with people, which I enjoy. When I worked at Ruby Tuesday, I made a bit more money, but I did the same boring stuff every day, hardly ever talked to anyone else, and most of the managers only talked to me if they wanted to complain about something I'd done without even giving me a chance to speak up (including one time when a woman falsely claimed that I'd yelled at her child, and the manager scolded me about it while I was working in front of many of my coworkers). I'd take the Hardee's job over the Ruby Tuesday any day. There are ways to make any job better, even if it's not a job you're in love with.

When it comes to teaching, though, most of us are passionate. Yes, there are the pension jockeys who are just counting the days to retirement, but I believe they're the minority. Most of us are doing this because we care. After all, given the amount of education professional teachers need, we could probably get more lucrative jobs (we're not "those who can't"). But rather than ask teachers "what can we do to help you do your job better," far too many people think they can give orders based on faulty assumptions that will somehow improve things. The most powerful of these is the idea of taking money away from failing schools. Yes, there are schools that are in danger, but many of them are seriously underfunded. Giving more money wouldn't solve everything, but it would allow hiring more teachers, smaller class sizes, additional extra-curriculars and non-core subjects (which are proven to reduce drop-out rates), and other helpful programs. Even more critical, though, is to ask people in the schools how they'd like things to go, including teachers, parents, and even (radical as this sounds!) the students themselves. The people who are at the school should have say in making decisions.

Instead, faced with serious (though, I feel, exaggerated- a lot of students get good public educations) problems in education, conservatives came up with this brilliant plan: Allow parents to pull their children out of school and take their money with them. You can dress it up as school choice or tuition tax credits if vouchers is a word that doesn't poll well, but it's still the same bad idea. First off, if schools compete for students, they won't focus on doing better, they'll focus on looking better. This means that the students must perform well on measurable, standardized objectives. Again, though, standardized tests are only able to measure knowledge superficially. Teachers have to divert time from real, student-centered learning to focus on making sure they're ready for tests. I'm not saying I don't think there should be any state or national standards, but I think that local teachers, principals, and school board members are better able to judge whether students have met those standards than politicians and test-makers. Second, the theory is that threatening to take money or actually taking it from failing schools will somehow make them improve. This only makes any sense if your underlying assumption is that teachers aren't trying hard enough. To which I say, we're doing the best we can, but we can't make bricks without straw. It's disrespectful to people who have chosen to dedicate their lives to other people's children to assume that they can't be trusted and have to be forced to do their jobs. And just as a follow-up, in places such as Michigan which allow school choice, parents do not necessarily send their kids to the "best" (however that's defined) schools. They're more likely to go to the most convenient ones; e.g., ones where they can drop their kids off on the way to work. So parents' choices really aren't even encouraging schools to improve, if they ever did.

I've got to go, but I've got a lot more to say about this.
Jurgan - [jurgan6 at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Fri, Sep 7, 2007 6:41:12 pm EDT from 68.59.13.169

dph_of_rules> CHECK!
Battle Beast - [Canada]
That is all I will say.
posted @ Fri, Sep 7, 2007 5:39:27 pm EDT from 142.59.132.201

The following observation had a profound impact on my opinion of Public Education:

The people who set the policy for Public Education claim to be protecting the best interests of poor and middle-class U.S. Citizens. Yet all of them exercise school choice for their children. Most send their children to private, parochial, exam, or charter schools. The ones that do send their kids to fully public schools have use their exceptional wealth to shop towns and neighborhoods to make sure their kid is still going to the school of their choice.

The middle class and poor that these people are supposedly defending don't have that sort of mobility. They don't get any choice as to where the public education dollars allocated for their children go. The Elites use their special status to make sure their own kids always benefit from the choice denied to others. That's the worst sort of hypocrisy.

As to the idea that private schools only care about getting paid, that may be true. However, they only get paid if they provide what the customer wants - something that doesn't happen in a non-competitive market. Sure, some parents will ruin their children through social promotion schemes. It's their responsibility as parents, though. Claiming the public schools in some way care about education more than private institutions, however, is laughable. Public schools spend too much time and effort trying to avoid lawsuits and government intervention because as a government institution they don't have the same sort of protections against idiotic litigation that a voluntary and contractual enrollment would provide.
Marty Lund - [kaioto at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Fri, Sep 7, 2007 1:32:28 pm EDT from 67.128.112.166

Gentleman, bi-sexuals, or lesbians,

If you could spend the night with one of the following, who would it be?

Angela, Desdemona, Delilah, Demona, Obsidiana, Ophelia, Sora, Turquesa, Una
Sarah Browne, Robyn Canmore, Maria Chavez, Amanda Chung, Dominique Destine, Lydia Duane, Princess Elena, Finella, Fleance, Fox, Gruoch, Princess Katharine, Lois, Maggie Reed, Mary, Beth Maza, Diane Maza, Elisa Maza, Molly, The Panther Queen in human form, Anastasia Renard, Shari, Tea, Margot Yale
Banshee, Grandmother, Lady of the Lake, Luna, Phoebe, Selene, Titania



Me? Gruoch (any age depicted in City of Stone)
TiniTinyTony - [tinitinytony at hotmail dot com]
Content makes poor men rich; discontentment makes rich men poor.
posted @ Fri, Sep 7, 2007 1:25:29 pm EDT from 159.240.11.254

Demona's cup size> It's hard to say. She's pretty stylized, and I keep getting thrown by the relative size of her waist, especially in comparison to her hips. That's a pretty athletic form of the hourglass if I've ever seen one. :P
Asatira
posted @ Fri, Sep 7, 2007 10:04:32 am EDT from 131.204.221.238

Greg B> Being about that myself, I would tend to agree. Probably 36C, but maybe 38. I know there isn't any obvious back musculature supporting the wings, but the gargs are stylized a bit. ;P
Kerry (Kth) Boyd - [kth dot dragon at gmail dot com]
posted @ Fri, Sep 7, 2007 8:49:50 am EDT from 199.38.51.134

The 1996 entry for today answers (or goes a long way towards answering) this question: "How did Jon Canmore/Castaway contact the Illuminati so quickly after 'Hunter's Moon'?" Evidently they'd left their phone number or an equivalent with the Canmores after Jason turned them down, with a tone of "In case you change your mind...."

This also suggests that the Illuminati were already ready to set up the Quarrymen at this point, or close enough to it that they were seeking out the Canmores to recruit them for it. (It makes sense that they must have had the Quarryman project ready by the time of "Hunter's Moon" - "The Journey" is taking place very shortly afterwards, and even the Society couldn't turn out that many uniforms and hammers in the interim.)

I'm not surprised that Jason turned them down; knowing him, his attitude was "This is our family's business. We don't need any help from outsiders to hunt down the Demon."
Todd Jensen
Gargoyles - did for monstrous-looking statues what "Watership Down" did for rabbits!
posted @ Fri, Sep 7, 2007 6:54:57 am EDT from 4.244.212.136

Sure, I'll go with C. I'd say 34 or 36.

I'm really starting to like the "This Day in Gargoyles History." I've been going through my Gargoyles DVDs with two friends of mine. This past Sunday, we got through the first six episodes of the second season. As we were watching "Legion," I remember making a joke about how it took Coldstone long enough to get his shit together. Never figured that Xanatos activated the repair system.
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75 at gmail dot com]
"You know, you and my mother, you're like two peas in a pod. She can't use a phone, either, but she's seventy years old. What's your f**king excuse?" -Tony Soprano
posted @ Fri, Sep 7, 2007 6:39:58 am EDT from 71.62.204.109

Antiyonder> From ASKGREG: "This day in Gargoyles' Universe History....

May 7th...
1996
Demona and Thailog return to Manhattan and hire Dr. Sevarius away from Gen-U-Tech..."

I would say that Sevarius no longer works for Xanatos. Thailog and Demona must have offered him more payment than he was getting at Gen-U-Tech.

It's interesting that in "The Cage" Xanatos doesn't let Talon kill Anton because he says he's too valuable an asset to lose, and then to only have him a few months later being bought out by Thailog.

Anyone else notice today's "This day in Gargoyles' Universe History" for 1996?

"The Illuminati make contact with the Canmore family of Hunters, seeking an alliance. Jason turns them down."

Interesting.
Brigadoon Traveller
posted @ Fri, Sep 7, 2007 6:00:41 am EDT from 84.13.96.13

Greg B> So.... Demona's cup size?

I say she's a large C.

Anyone else?


And I mean this is both ways, "I'm not touching that one".


Since the Goliath Chronicles was brought up and Sevarius appeared in #5, something came to mind. In TGC, it was mentioned that Xanatos let Sevarius go after the fued with the clan ended in "Genesis Undone".

With his portrayal in the canon concerned, would he keep Anton employed or let him go as his GC Counterpart did?
Antiyonder - [antiyonder at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Fri, Sep 7, 2007 2:35:02 am EDT from 71.115.192.199

So.... Demona's cup size?

I say she's a large C.

Anyone else?
Greg Bishansky - [<---- The 12th Annual Gathering of the Gargoyles]
"Never hate your enemies. It clouds your judgement." - Michael Corleone.
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 11:25:41 pm EDT from 67.87.175.245

Public education - I do believe in collective payment for education of children. I don't believe only parents of kids needing a basic education should pay for it. I believe society as a whole should help pay for basic education. I do believe in letting parents have vouchers for an amount of money to send their kids to school, provided said school meets some standards. One such standard is making sure that you're not funding an environment that actively promotes racism or religious intolerance (religious tolerance does not mean saying that all religions are equal, but involves teaching respect for individual's beliefs/non-beliefs.). As far as home-schooling is concerned, I have no problems along as a few conditions are met: 1)parents/tutors demonstrate knowledge of material that is taught; 2)once a month unscheduled visits are made to check for child abuse/neglect and child is learning when parent says so; and 3)once a quarter independent tests are given on a neutral site to verify learning is occurring. One of my biggest concerns with home-schooling is its potential use to cover up child abuse/neglect.

Marty Lund - ty for answering my question.

Vaevictis Asmadi - <DHP> It's either 'dph' or 'phd', not anything else. <The US government has been severely falling behind on breaking up monopolies in the last few decades. Seems that persuing corporate abuse is no longer deemed important.> I agree that's a problem and I wish there was I could pick and choose the exact qualities that I want in a president. I think, ideally, the best situation is where pro-business groups think the president is going too far while other groups think the president isn't going far enough.

Jurgan - <I don't know why conservatives take it as an article of faith that competition is always good.> 99% of the time competition is good. It's about motivations. If there was only one telephone company, what's that company's motivation to improve customer service or too keep rates low? On the other hand, it's not good land use for 3-4 different companies running competitive sewer lines through a city.

I used to think that competition among various ideas was the best way to produce good writing. Now, I lean towards the historian type approach where the writer just sits back and let the characters tell the writer what happened.

Anybody notice that Greg Weisman indicated that he's currently writing #9. That's good news.
dph_of_rules
Whatever happenned to simplicity?
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 11:18:41 pm EDT from 71.29.241.36

Demon@> It'd depend on how the funding was handled, but I agree that having both public and private schools is better than just having one or the other.
Kerry (Kth) Boyd - [Kth_dragon at hotmail dot com]
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 10:42:09 pm EDT from 24.98.74.35

Matt> So grade schools would become more like colleges in that respect.
Kerry (Kth) Boyd - [Kth_dragon at hotmail dot com]
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 10:40:28 pm EDT from 24.98.74.35

Well, I will give the point of view of an outsider. My experience with private schools is that the only thing they care about its getting paid. They wont give a damn if you learn or if you dont as far as you pay your bills. They will let you pass with the only excuse that you stay at that school. There should be both private and public schools, Why go to extremes?
There would be competition, and also the possibily for people with little resources to learn too. I mean, have them in count too. Having only private shcools woudnt denied education to a lot of people?
Demon@
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 10:39:53 pm EDT from 24.232.131.228

Jurgan> Um, that's how it is now. To those that hold the purse strings, standardized test scores are everything.

Learning itself might not be an efficient process, but there are ways of teaching that are better at conveying the material and have a higher percentage of retention than others. There may not be a "best," since there are different learning styles and what's best for one wouldn't be for others, but there are better and worse ways of teaching. Efficiency doesn't have to be a bad word in education; it would mean the students get the best possible education (learn the most they're able to understand, retain, and make use of) for the time and effort they and the teachers put into it. Cramming so much into a child's head that s/he doesn't understand it all, retain it for future use, and/or can't apply it is not efficient, it's wasteful and damaging.

It'd also be great if schools encouraged thinking for oneself, creativity, the reasons behind things, and so on.
Kerry (Kth) Boyd - [Kth_dragon at hotmail dot com]
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 10:38:29 pm EDT from 24.98.74.35

Uh, Jurgan. That's the way it is NOW, without competition. Having only one choice means that if that choice sucks you can't do anything about it. Having lots of choices (via competition between schools) means parents and students can choose which school (and thus which educational system) they wish to use. Schools will vie to have the most learned graduates and parents and students will look at that when choosing a school. Competition among schools will only make them all better schools.
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"Let this mark the beginning of a Golden Age, between all our clans, both Human and Gargoyle!!!" -Macbeth, 'City of Stone'
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 10:29:14 pm EDT from 24.207.163.239

I don't know why conservatives take it as an article of faith that competition is always good. Competition can be harmful, and in education I think it can't help but be so. How can you be the best at educating? The free market model is to be the most efficient. But learning isn't efficient. It takes time. Learners go down dead ends and explore false starts before genuine understanding takes root. But in a competitive model, all that counts is covering as much material as possible. And so teachers are forced to teach to standardized tests, which are a mile wide and an inch deep, rather than being trusted to teach their students the best way they know how (because, after all, politicians in the state capital and in Washington know the students better than the teachers who see them every day). In the end, teachers become nothing more than test prep technicians, whose job it is to man the educational assembly line, cramming as many facts into students' heads as possible. Meanwhile, the students don't understand how all these facts connect, grow discouraged, and give up on learning all of this pointless material. This is what you can expect if competition between schools becomes the rule in American education.
Jurgan - [jurgan6 at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 8:45:52 pm EDT from 68.59.13.169

I think it'd be a good idea to make government funding available to private as well as public schools. I have a friend from the Netherlands who explained that in their school system, both kinds get public funding. The private schools can also require the families to pay for the education; the public ones can only request donations (which allow the kids to go to certain extra activities, like camps).

There is also no double standard in regards to what is taught; for instance, even religiously-based schools are required to teach evolutionary biology (though they are allowed to have other classes that put forward their viewpoint). I'm not sure how well that last bit would go over in the US, but that funding system would work so much better and actually make private schools a viable option for lower income families.
Kerry (Kth) Boyd - [Kth_dragon at hotmail dot com]
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 8:06:12 pm EDT from 24.98.74.35

Amen, Marty.
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"Let this mark the beginning of a Golden Age, between all our clans, both Human and Gargoyle!!!" -Macbeth, 'City of Stone'
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 7:49:25 pm EDT from 24.207.163.239

Vaevictis Asmadi >> It certainly can be.

First of all, you can the label "Education" on anything and claim, "It's good for you." That doesn't make it true. "Education," has a remarkably different meaning when the content is assigned by Maoists or Stalinists as opposed to the people living in the school district.

On a similar note, you can slap the word, "Free," on anything too. Likewise, that doesn't make it true. Public Education is not free. It is, in fact, expensive and ~ someone ~ always pays for it.

Public Education in the United States is in such terrible disrepair in the United States for the same reasons a monopoly can be terrible for consumers - it doesn't have competition to keep it honest. Much like Anti-Trust law violators, the Public Education establishment uses every resource at its disposal to prevent honest competition - including lobbying governments to deny public funds, charters, or credentials for independent schools.

Public funding for Education seems like a good idea to me, so long as the funds are directed by the choices of the parents / guardians enrolling their students. Public institutions of education that are part of the government, however, are a terrible idea. It leads to "rights" lawsuits over stuff that would never have been an issue if citizens chose their schools and signed contracts privately. It leads to monolithic government employee Union structures. It politicizes education and encourages non-competitive practices that work to the detriment of students.

No. I don't think self-sustaining entities that monopolize a market and create undue barriers to competition are a good idea whether they are public or private. They are, at best, a necessary evil in a few cases. Public Education isn't one of them. Children deserve the better education that a competitive market could provide them.
Marty Lund - [kaioto at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 6:36:05 pm EDT from 67.128.112.166

Wait -- you're actually saying that offering free, public education to all citizens is BAD?
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 5:23:26 pm EDT from 138.192.30.112

dph_of_rules >> Honestly, the trick with Diamond's position is that it isn't worthwhile for anyone else to try doing what they do. There isn't a lot of money in it unless you have a huge network of retailers you supply - and they tend to be 1 or 2-store operations - holes in the wall. That's a huge network you need to build in exchange for very small revenues. Even if you are about to build that network, are you going to offer the customer a better deal in terms of price or services? Is it enough of a difference to make the comic-shop decide to change their inventory process?

The answer is typically, "no." That reality alone is enough to discourage people from seriously competing with Diamond without any foul play being introduced to the equation.
Marty Lund - [kaioto at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 3:05:22 pm EDT from 67.128.112.166

Vaevictis Asmadi >> To be fair, the laws aren't there to prevent someone at being the best at their job in the market. The laws are there to prevent the top dog from creating unreasonable barriers to entry, thereby eliminating competition. It cripples every other citizen's right to free enterprise and ultimately leads to exploitation of the cornered consumer.

You know, kind of like how governments do it with Public Education and Socialized Medicine - where they engineer policies to make sure the private sector is completely nationalized, outlawed, or unduly impeded from competing for business.

If other people can compete, but they simply can't do the job as efficiently or as competently as you can with your contacts, processes, human resources, and networking - that's just how the ball bounces. There's no Anti-Trust case there. If you start using your funds in other ways to provide barriers such as lobbying the government to bar new entry into the market or threatening vendors / customers who do business with competitors - then you're asking to get slapped down.

- Marty Lund
Marty Lund - [kaioto at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 2:57:16 pm EDT from 67.128.112.166

Welcome Batwings!

DHP >> The US government has been severely falling behind on breaking up monopolies in the last few decades. Seems that persuing corporate abuse is no longer deemed important.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 2:29:07 pm EDT from 138.192.30.169

I do enjoy the day in Gargoyle' Universe History, especially when they are not cryptic and vague. I would enjoy more revealing material, but Greg W said himself that he's going to be more tightly lipped, now that he has a medium to share his stories.

***

I found on wikipedia this concerning Diamond Comics: "In the Summer of 1997, the U.S. Department of Justice launched an antitrust investigation into the comics industry and the alleged monopoly of Diamond Comics. The investigation was closed in November 2000, with no further action deemed necessary on the basis that, although Diamond enjoyed a monopoly in the North American comic book direct market distribution, they did not enjoy a monopoly on book distribution (books including non-comic books), and therefore had competitors."
TiniTinyTony - [tinitinytony at hotmail dot com]
Content makes poor men rich; discontentment makes rich men poor.
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 10:32:41 am EDT from 159.240.11.254

Oops, hit the submit button slightly too soon.

I have one question left: If Diamond Comics has such a strong control (near monopoly) over the distribution of comics, why hasn't the government tried to break it up?
dph_of_rules
Whatever happenned to simplicity?
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 8:41:38 am EDT from 71.29.241.36

Has anybody noticed that This day in Gargoyles' Universe History is currently going through events in "early" Season 2. Greg just finished today filling us in on all the dates related to Leader of the Pack. I'm going to venture by this time next week that we will know most/all the dates for the events for the 1st 3 stories of Season 2.

Battle Beast - <Greg said that ONE ISSUE is ONE THIRD of an episode.> Except for the 1st two issues. Then there's the stand-alone issue with the Tibet story. I would say the next issue puts us 3/13 of the way through a minimal season.
dph_of_rules
Whatever happenned to simplicity?
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 8:39:37 am EDT from 71.29.241.36

I would think it was Goliath actually.
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"Let this mark the beginning of a Golden Age, between all our clans, both Human and Gargoyle!!!" -Macbeth, 'City of Stone'
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 7:38:00 am EDT from 24.207.163.239

I haven't done an exact count, but I think Angela holds the record for number of episodes where she gets tied up or otherwise restrained. I suppose that earns her the April O'Neil Award. ;)

295 days left until The Gathering 2008 in Chicago, Illinois!
Patrick - [<-- The Gathering 2008]
"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 6:59:20 am EDT from 67.38.243.193

Sorry for the double post.

Welcome to the room, Batwings. :)
KingCobra_582 - [KingCobra_582 at hotmail dot com]
'Thirty-Six. Nine.' - Issue #5
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 12:10:29 am EDT from 76.222.100.227

Batwings> This isn't a chat room.
KingCobra_582 - [KingCobra_582 at hotmail dot com]
'Thirty-Six. Nine.' - Issue #5
posted @ Thu, Sep 6, 2007 12:09:41 am EDT from 76.222.100.227

aaaahhhh.
i get it now
this is my first time in a chat room so yeah
thankyou
Batwings? - [evanescencefan55 at aol dot com]
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 11:09:36 pm EDT from 65.9.12.157

Glad you got it! :)

(sorry, I won't post anymore tonight gang.)
Battle Beast - [Canada]
That is all I will say.
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 11:08:39 pm EDT from 142.59.132.201

Batwings?> When we welcoma new member to the Comment room, someone usually offers cookies for that person to eat... sort of an "Internet welcome basket."
Battle Beast - [Canada]
That is all I will say.
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 11:07:56 pm EDT from 142.59.132.201

oh
i get it now
thanx
Batwings? - [evanescencefan55 at aol dot com]
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 11:07:49 pm EDT from 65.9.12.157

Sorry.

DPH, MATT> Greg said that ONE ISSUE is ONE THIRD of an episode. So there for... 39 issues, we have a season.

Or when ever GREG lets us know.
Battle Beast - [Canada]
That is all I will say.
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 11:06:25 pm EDT from 142.59.132.201

thanx
um... sry but what?
Batwings? - [evanescencefan55 at aol dot com]
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 11:04:41 pm EDT from 65.9.12.157

*holds up a trey of cookies for Batwings?*

Batswings?: Try the Gingersnaps.

Welcome!
Battle Beast - [Canada]
That is all I will say.
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 11:03:15 pm EDT from 142.59.132.201

hehe sry but
what's the cookie tray?
Batwings? - [evanescencefan55 at aol dot com]
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 10:02:39 pm EDT from 65.9.12.157

thankyou very much Jurgan. maybe i will stick around. thx
Batwings? - [evanescencefan55 at aol dot com]
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 9:59:35 pm EDT from 65.9.12.157

Batwings?: Five so far. Number 6 should come out sometime this month, I imagine, and it's a good place to pick up, since it'll be a new story.

Welcome to the room! Stick around, and help yourself to the cookie tray.
Jurgan - [jurgan6 at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 9:57:10 pm EDT from 68.59.13.169

hi im new here but im confused.
first of all (please dont laugh at me)
how many comics are there so far?
thanx
Batwings? - [evanescencefan55 at aol dot com]
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 9:49:39 pm EDT from 65.9.12.157

Ransom> And yet somehow it is not the worst TGC episode. Far from it.
KingCobra_582 - [KingCobra_582 at hotmail dot com]
'Thirty-Six. Nine.' - Issue #5
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 9:28:58 pm EDT from 76.222.100.227

Rocket> I'll probably check out those episodes you guys spoke of. "Possession" and "Ransom". I don't think I've seen them (either that or I can't remember them).

I'd recommend you avoid Ransom, unless you want nightmare.
Antiyonder - [antiyonder at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 7:10:11 pm EDT from 71.115.192.199

Comics Release Dates> Diamond Comics pretty much has a monopoly on comics distribution. So since they send their comics out for Wednesdays, new comics nearly always come out on Wednesdays, with exceptions when there's a holiday during the week, such as Labor Day.
Demonskrye
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 4:38:37 pm EDT from 209.6.249.41

KingCobra582 >

lol, figures it was only a dream. Ah well.

I'll probably check out those episodes you guys spoke of. "Possession" and "Ransom". I don't think I've seen them (either that or I can't remember them).

Thanks for your help guys. It was really getting on my nerves that I couldn't remember if it was a dream or an actual episode. Now i know, and the annoyance is gone! WAHOO!

I might come back every now and again. I like Gargoyles and this is the only place I've found that has fans.
Rocket - [dragonxx30 at yahoo dot com]
=^^= Nya
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 3:56:44 pm EDT from 76.190.158.17

I believe comics have a common release date of Wednesdays. Sometimes a holiday will throw a week off, for example, since Labor Day was Monday, then comics are coming out Thursday this week instead of Wednesday.

And not all movies come out Friday's anymore, but most do.
TiniTinyTony - [tinitinytony at hotmail dot com]
Content makes poor men rich; discontentment makes rich men poor.
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 3:04:58 pm EDT from 159.240.11.254

Do most/all comics come out on Wednesdays (like Tuesdays for music and Fridays for movies)?
Kerry (Kth) Boyd - [kth dot dragon at gmail dot com]
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 2:20:24 pm EDT from 199.38.51.134

Diamond has their shipping list up for 9/12 and Gargoyles #6 is NOT on it. Here's hoping for 9/19!
TiniTinyTony - [tinitinytony at hotmail dot com]
Content makes poor men rich; discontentment makes rich men poor.
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 2:12:33 pm EDT from 159.240.11.254

I know this is totally off topic, but I just read it and it really affected me. I find this greatly distressing.

http://www.bestlifeonline.com/cms/publish/travel-leisure/Our_oceans_are_turning_into_plastic_are_we.shtml
Kerry (Kth) Boyd - [kth dot dragon at gmail dot com]
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 11:30:33 am EDT from 199.38.51.134

Limited series> I was not under the impression any of the titles were going to be limited. I was beginning to suspect with the last issue of Haunted Mansion (they finished the Gracey story, and the mansion disappears to where ever in a different story). I thought Wonderland was going to go on for a while, but I can see how it'd have a definite story to cover. I'm a little disappointed though. I do appreciate the irony that the add-on that Gargoyles was has become the only one to continue past a limited run. Who knew?
Asatira
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 11:18:56 am EDT from 131.204.97.8

Matt> But there was no shadowy figure in that episode, and the clock tower never showed up in it.

So it couldn't be that episode.
KingCobra_582 - [KingCobra_582 at hotmail dot com]
'Thirty-Six. Nine.' - Issue #5
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 7:32:44 am EDT from 76.222.100.227

Rocket> You could also be thinking of the TGC episode "Ransom". I believe Lex was restrained in that episode as well.
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"Let this mark the beginning of a Golden Age, between all our clans, both Human and Gargoyle!!!" -Macbeth, 'City of Stone'
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 6:41:10 am EDT from 24.207.163.239

Matt - <Just when does Season 3 end and when will we start calling the comic Season 4? Will it be the end of Clan-Building?> If you go by the tv series minimum definition of 13 episodes per season, it's going to be a while. Now, I'd like to think the end of "Clan-building" issues of the comics would mark the end of season 3, but that's just me.

gxb - thx for asking the question.

Phil - <SLG was originally only planning to license three titles: Haunted Mansion, Wonderland, and TRON. During the negotiations Greg Weisman was put in contact with Dan Vado and Gargoyles was added as a fourth license. Now it seems that the last title standing is that last-minute addition, and none of the originals did well enough to warrant an extension.> Talk about irony.
dph_of_rules
Whatever happenned to simplicity?
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 5:24:50 am EDT from 71.29.241.36

Rocket> You were dreaming it.

The only thing that even vaguely sounds like an episode like that was 'Possession', but that's only b/c of the 'Lex tied up' thing. Also, he was not using a computer, there was no shadowy figure (it was the Coldstone shell). and it wasn't Goliath he talked to afterwards. It was 'Brooklyn,' 'Broadway', and 'Angela'.

I applaud your vivid imagination, though.
KingCobra_582 - [KingCobra_582 at hotmail dot com]
Thirty-Six. Nine.
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 2:58:11 am EDT from 76.222.100.227

I can't really remember too much of it. I had it a few years ago. It was only until recently that I began remembering this since I found episodes of Gargoyles on YouTube.

Lets see... *thinks*... I remember Lex typing on a computer, a dark shadowy figure approaches him, ties him up and tosses him somewhere in the clock tower where they live (can't remember where), and steals the information that Lex had on the computer. I don't know what the info was.

I think I also remember towards the end, Lex got free and explained to Goliath what happened. But even that part is iffy since I hardly remember anything from it.

Sometimes when I have dreams of certain shows, they are like episodes that my mind is producing, but producing so well that it confuses me and makes me think what I dreamt was a real episode.
Rocket - [dragonxx30 at yahoo dot com]
=^^= Nya
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 12:50:33 am EDT from 76.190.158.17

Greg B.> Thanks for that. Gives me reason to relax.
KingCobra_582 - [KingCobra_582 at hotmail dot com]
Thirty-Six. Nine.
posted @ Wed, Sep 5, 2007 12:46:15 am EDT from 76.222.100.227

The episode never happened. What else happened in the dream if you don't mind my asking?
Antiyonder - [antiyonder at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Tue, Sep 4, 2007 11:41:43 pm EDT from 71.115.192.199

I'm nervous to ask this because it might be a stupid question... I hope no one laughs at me...

Now, I can't remember if this ever happened in an episode, or if it was some wacky dream I had.

All I can remember was that Lexington was tied up and no one could find him. Again, it might just be some crazy dream I may of had. But my brother says that it might have happened because he slightly remembers that as well.

Was there an episode where that happened?
Rocket - [dragonxx30 at yahoo dot com]
=^^= Nya
posted @ Tue, Sep 4, 2007 11:31:43 pm EDT from 76.190.158.17

Battle Beast> I don't disagree. I never heard about any of those comics as being intended to be limited. But, hey, we're apparently still going, so, yaye?
Greg Bishansky - [<---- The 12th Annual Gathering of the Gargoyles]
"Never hate your enemies. It clouds your judgement." - Michael Corleone.
posted @ Tue, Sep 4, 2007 10:42:29 pm EDT from 67.87.175.245

I think SLG is making an excuse for each comic. "Wonderland" was suppsoed to be limited? It probably wasn't selling. Same with the other two.

But Gargoyles was selling, so they are keeping it.

I Dunno.
Battle Beast - [Canada]
That is all I will say.
posted @ Tue, Sep 4, 2007 10:41:06 pm EDT from 142.59.132.201

Wingless: You and I should talk more often. I actually have the album "Lola Versus Powerman and the Moneygoround," and I think it's f**king fantastic from start to end. I have a few albums by King Crimson on the spaces underneath that (I think the people who say rock is devil music are morons, but I do concede that Satan was in the studio when Crimson recorded "Larks Tongues in Aspic"). My tastes are actually very erratic. Guns and Roses's "Appetite for Destruction" is in the space on my rack underneath the Grateful Dead's "American Beauty."

But anyway, feel free to e-mail or IM sometime.
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75 at gmail dot com]
"Between thought and expression lies a lifetime." -Velvet Underground ("Some Kinda Love")
posted @ Tue, Sep 4, 2007 7:31:49 pm EDT from 71.62.204.109

Thanks for finding that, Greg. Though I figured Bad Guys meant the continuation of the regular comic past issue #12, It's always good to get an official or semi-official confirmation.
Vaevictis Asmadi
posted @ Tue, Sep 4, 2007 4:51:55 pm EDT from 138.192.30.174

Demonskyre's last post really made me think about the first six issues.

There are six stories among these six issues and I really think it is great that they tell the stories they do. If the comic did end after #6, I can think of no more symbolic stories to be told. #1-2 retells and expands on the only universally accepted TGC episode, the only "real" part of Season 3 for all these years. #3-5 tells the long awaited Double Date story, one of the few episodes Greg had planned for Season 3. And #6, as Demonskyre pointed out, gets us to a benchmark that Marvel was just not able to reach, the Tibet episode.

Anyway, another thought has crossed my mind whenever people refer to the comic as "Season 3". Just when does Season 3 end and when will we start calling the comic Season 4? Will it be the end of Clan-Building? Or will we get some sort of Season Finale? Or will Greg just tell us? I know its a comic and things are obviously different, even Greg is trying to stay away from TV terminology, but will we just go on saying Season 3 forever?
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"Let this mark the beginning of a Golden Age, between all our clans, both Human and Gargoyle!!!" -Macbeth, 'City of Stone'
posted @ Tue, Sep 4, 2007 4:49:29 pm EDT from 24.207.163.239

Thanks for that news, Greg.

Interesting note: If I remember correctly from a few years ago, SLG was originally only planning to license three titles: Haunted Mansion, Wonderland, and TRON. During the negotiations Greg Weisman was put in contact with Dan Vado and Gargoyles was added as a fourth license. Now it seems that the last title standing is that last-minute addition, and none of the originals did well enough to warrant an extension.
Phil - [p1anderson at go dot com]
posted @ Tue, Sep 4, 2007 4:37:57 pm EDT from 134.215.196.82

Thanks G. That takes a load off for now.
TiniTinyTony - [tinitinytony at hotmail dot com]
Content makes poor men rich; discontentment makes rich men poor.
posted @ Tue, Sep 4, 2007 3:53:36 pm EDT from 159.240.11.254

Greg B> Thanks for the clarification.
Asatira
posted @ Tue, Sep 4, 2007 3:15:35 pm EDT from 131.204.221.238

Okay, de Guzman finally replied to me over at the SLG blog.

I asked what the cancellation for "Haunted Mansion" meant for the other Disney titles.

Here's what she said:

"It means we have to extend our license if we're to continue publishing the titles. Wonderland was always supposed to be limited, so the story is ending at issue six. Same with Tron. But we're continuing the Gargoyles license, obviously, otherwise we wouldn't start a new series based on the property."

http://slg-news.livejournal.com/207393.html
Greg Bishansky - [<---- The 12th Annual Gathering of the Gargoyles]
"Never hate your enemies. It clouds your judgement." - Michael Corleone.
posted @ Tue, Sep 4, 2007 3:12:33 pm EDT from 67.87.175.245

I don't need it. I NEED it.

It's not a need, more than it's just really, really nice to have. I love rich in depth storylines and I would love to see this one to the end.
TiniTinyTony - [tinitinytony at hotmail dot com]
Content makes poor men rich; discontentment makes rich men poor.
posted @ Tue, Sep 4, 2007 2:07:37 pm EDT from 159.240.11.254

Okay, so we don't *NEED* the comic per se, but I'm glad to have it.
KingCobra_582 - [KingCobra_582 at hotmail dot com]
'Thirty-Six. Nine.' - Issue #5
posted @ Tue, Sep 4, 2007 2:02:48 pm EDT from 76.222.100.227

Harvester of Eyes - By the way, love the quote. Don't know too many people that remember that Kinks tune^_^
"Robert owes half to Grenville
Who in turn gave half to Larry
Who adored my instrumentals
And so he gave half to a foreign publisher
She took half the money that was earned in some far distant land
Gave back half to Larry and I end up with half of goodness knows what
Oh can somebody explain why things go on this way
I thought they were my friends I can't believe it's me, I can't believe that I'm so green."
Wingless
posted @ Tue, Sep 4, 2007 12:24:03 pm EDT from 74.115.187.62

I think it would be pretty tragic to lose the comic now that we have it. As a fandom, I think we've fought pretty hard to support "the cause" - and to have gotten new stories-period, let alone from the series creator is pretty amazing in itself. Let's face it, we love our Gargoyles(I know I do). I just wish we could see a little more support from Disney. I can't believe they can see fit to put on TV ads for DVD releases like Zack & Cody, and not support tried & true animated shows when released on DVD(If it weren't for a site like tvshowsondvd.com, I wouldn't know about them at all) I've not seen an ad for ANY of the Disney afternoon DVD's(Feel free to correct me if you've seen 'em). I mean, since Gargoyles is a Disney property-how hard would it be to tack on a 60 second blurb on to one of their other animated DVDs to plug the comic-or for that matter, the other classic TV DVD sets. I know what you're going to tell me-that's the way Disney is - but there's the old adage: You gotta spend money to make money. You can't just throw out DVD sets without plugging them - same goes for the comic. SLG I think is doing their best, but Disney does have all the power here. I would expect that if we ever do see the S2V2 of Gargs that there will be a blurb about the comic some where on the DVD. I just hope it happens.
Wingless
posted @ Tue, Sep 4, 2007 12:15:31 pm EDT from 74.115.187.62

I wouldn't be too hard on the owner of the comic shop Travis went to. More than likely he read some of Dan Vado's initial frustrations with handling the Disney license and came to the incorrect but not unreasonable conclusion that the license with Disney might not be renewed. Likewise, when a comic disappears from the schedule for several motnhs, some comic shop owners are going to assume that it's not coming back. We knew the situation because we follow the news about the comic very closely, and for some of the fandom, it's the only comic they follow. For a comic shop owner with lots of news to keep on top of, digging around on the internet to try and figure out if "Gargoyles" has been cancelled or is just running really, really late is not a huge priority. Since the book is from a smaller press and not a huge seller yet, the big comic news sites like Newsarama aren't putting up articles explaining what's up with the comic when it misses a release date. It's not really the comic shop owner's job to keep on top of what's up with "Gargoyles"; it's SLG's job to inform them.

As for the future of the comic, I'm trying to be optimistic, but I have concerns like everyone else. It's good to know that the Disney licenses are all separate, so all three of the other books can be cancelled without affecting "Gargoyles". "Bad Guys" may help, as it's easier to keep people's attention when a title is on the shelf every month instead of every other month (or less). I think Greg's enthusiasm ccombined with his experience with writing for comics is a combination that none of the other Disney titles have. (There are talented people on the other books, but I don't think it's at all insulting to them to say that none of them have the connection with their projects that Greg does to "Gargoyles".) I guess my main concern is whether the benefits are enough for both parties to keep the series going. Disney could just as easily decide that they're no getting enough out of the SLG deal and pull the plug from their end. I'm guessing that sales of the trade are going to be one of the big factors in determining the success of the comic, so I'd think about picking up a copy or two if you can. (Hey, it's probably going to be easier to find than the individual issues and it's cheaper than Season 2 Part 1.)

Can I survive without more issues of the comic? Sure. I love "Gargoyles", but I do have other interests and bigger things in my life. I've been telling my husband that I'd be pretty happy if we just got the next issue, in part because of the symbolism of this "lost" story that the original Marvel coic didn't last long enough to tell (and we know we're getting more than that unless something really unexpected happens). I'd be sad if we lost the comic, but I'd live. The fandom is what I'm more concerned about. Don't get me wrong; a lot of really great people have done an amazing job keeping "gargoyles" alive for all these years and with their continued work, I'm sure the fandom will never really die. But if, after two potential infusions of new interest (the DVDs and the comic) we do end up back where we started, with no more new content and no new DVDs, it's going to be really tough for the fandom to grow. And people d move no, some more than others. I do very much want Greg to have the opportunity to tell the whole "Gargoyles" story. But if we do lose the comic- and I sincerely hope we don't - the chances of that happening are going to be slimmer than ever.
Demonskrye
posted @ Tue, Sep 4, 2007 9:15:42 am EDT from 209.6.249.41

Yay for Dragon*Con! I got issues 1, 3, and 4 there (guess I'll have to order 2 and 5 online) and I saw a wonderful Demona on Saturday. ^_^

No, I don't have pictures. I have no camera. I lose. -_-
Kerry (Kth) Boyd - [kth dot dragon at gmail dot com]
posted @ Tue, Sep 4, 2007 8:46:45 am EDT from 199.38.51.134

Yes, clearly we all want the comic(s) to last as long as possible, but I'm thrilled with what we have so far. If Issues 3-5 is all we ever got (and obviously it isn't), I'd be happy. It could keep us going for another 10 years.

Anyway, like others have said, I'm not going to worry about the Disney contract with SLG until we have a bit more evidence that it is in trouble. For the moment, it seems that the Gargoyles comic is in good shape.
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"Let this mark the beginning of a Golden Age, between all our clans, both Human and Gargoyle!!!" -Macbeth, 'City of Stone'
posted @ Tue, Sep 4, 2007 6:37:41 am EDT from 24.207.163.239

King Cobra: I need water. I need oxygen. I need food. I need Pentasa to keep myself from getting intestinal blockage (at least for another ten years). I'd LIKE the comic to stick around, but I don't need it.
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75 at gmail dot com]
"Life goes on and on, and no one ever wins. And time goes quickly by just like the moneygoround. I only hope that I'll survive." -The Kinks ("Moneygoround")
posted @ Tue, Sep 4, 2007 5:20:33 am EDT from 71.62.204.109

This worries me. Severely. I really hope that SLG decides to renew their contract with Disney, because I want the comic to be around for a long, long time.

The fandom needs the comic, to be honest. It's the real season 3, after all.
KingCobra_582 - [KingCobra_582 at hotmail dot com]
Thirty-Six. Nine.
posted @ Tue, Sep 4, 2007 2:31:01 am EDT from 75.60.246.93

PATRICK> I've heard more than a few comic shops claim the comic was canceled between the releases of #2 and #3. These people never know what they're talking about.
Greg Bishansky - [<---- The 12th Annual Gathering of the Gargoyles]
"Never hate your enemies. It clouds your judgement." - Michael Corleone.
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 7:39:41 pm EDT from 67.87.175.245

It's amazing how at every little comic book store across the nation, the guy working the counter will pretend to know intimate details about what business decisions the publishing companies are doing.

I'm guessing that they wouldn't be starting up "Bad Guys" if the "Gargoyles" license was in imminent danger of cancellation.

298 days left until The Gathering 2008 in Chicago, Illinois!
Patrick - [<-- The Gathering 2008]
"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 7:37:19 pm EDT from 67.38.243.193

Sorry guys! I never meant to scare anyone. I'm guessing they are only rumors for now and Greg, thank you for the reassurance and due to the fact that there is a second thread of gargoyles comic coming out there is presumably little to worry about on behalf of the continuation of the Gargoyles Comic Book series. Happy Labor day everyone and take care!
Travis - [FoxSCruz at Gmail dot com]
- Travis
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 6:53:34 pm EDT from 69.232.209.109

$H!T for two reasons
1) There is no way they can cancel the contract! I would die a little inside.
2) I was awake until 12:30am last night because I didn't have to work today, and I wasn't even thinking about the countdown!
TiniTinyTony - [tinitinytony at hotmail dot com]
"What you're passionate about, from a cartoon standpoint, has to do with what age you were when you very first saw it." ~Greg Weisman
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 6:43:59 pm EDT from 71.181.212.142

Travis> Yes, Dan Vado has expressed frustrations with Disney before, a few months back he did an interview about it.

Me, personally, I'm hoping for the best but preparing for the worst. But, just remember that a second "Gargoyles" comic is starting up.
Greg Bishansky - [<---- The 12th Annual Gathering of the Gargoyles]
"Never hate your enemies. It clouds your judgement." - Michael Corleone.
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 6:42:11 pm EDT from 67.87.175.245

There is a comic book store here in Santa Cruz and I spoke with the owner and he just looked up the information and told me that SLG Publishing is thinking about not renewing their contract with Disney because its just too much of a hassle with not enough gain. I don't know any details, I was only curious what that meant for the Gargoyles series, if perhaps there was a back-up plan of some sort? Anyhow, thanks for the response.
Travis - [FoxSCruz at Gmail dot com]
- Travis
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 6:32:42 pm EDT from 69.232.209.109

Forgot... keep in mind that we have a new Gargoyles comic starting next month also.
Greg Bishansky - [<---- The 12th Annual Gathering of the Gargoyles]
"Never hate your enemies. It clouds your judgement." - Michael Corleone.
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 4:26:02 pm EDT from 67.87.175.245

Travis> Link?

All we know is that "Haunted Mansion" is coming to an end with #8, because the license is coming to an end, but apparently they're looking into renewing it.

http://slg-news.livejournal.com/207393.html?thread=1066785#t1066785
Greg Bishansky - [<---- The 12th Annual Gathering of the Gargoyles]
"Never hate your enemies. It clouds your judgement." - Michael Corleone.
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 4:25:29 pm EDT from 67.87.175.245

Hey, I got word that SLG may be cancelling its contract with Disney due to lack of expectations. Any word on how the Gargoyles Comic is going to suffer/deal with that decision?
Travis - [FoxSCruz at Gmail dot com]
- Travis
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 4:21:46 pm EDT from 69.232.209.109

Ok, I'll start off the week... So how about that local sports team?

Just kidding.

Happy Labor Day, everyone!
Battle Beast - [Canada]
That is all I will say.
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 12:33:19 pm EDT from 142.59.132.201

(10)Tenth! And away we go on with the show.
Vinnie - [tpeano29 at hotmail dot com]
It's silly. It's a silly movie. There just isn't much there. Once you take it all apart, there's not much story, is there?- George Lucas on Spider-Man 3
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 5:13:17 am EDT from 69.54.209.128

Ninth!
Spen
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 3:21:06 am EDT from 66.43.205.110

Err...unlucky 8 (damn reload button)
Siren
Don't knock on Death's door. Ring his doorbell and run, he hates that.
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 2:19:37 am EDT from 68.202.76.113

Lucky 7
Siren
Don't knock on Death's door. Ring his doorbell and run, he hates that.
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 2:19:03 am EDT from 68.202.76.113

:) Okay I'm alive and stillkicking
Demona May - [Real Demona At Yahoo Dot Com]
The Real living Insane One!
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 1:59:56 am EDT from 216.104.136.119

6th in the name of the number of the next gargoyles comic coming out
dph_of_rules
Whatever happenned to simplicity?
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 1:36:49 am EDT from 71.29.241.36

5th.
kingcobra_582 - [kingcobra_582 at hotmail dot com]
Thirty-Six. Nine.
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 12:59:01 am EDT from 65.24.158.145

4th.
kingcobra_582 - [kingcobra_582 at hotmail dot com]
Thirty-Six. Nine.
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 12:58:31 am EDT from 65.24.158.145

Just to move things along
*swings club* Foooooooooour!
Wingless
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 12:57:45 am EDT from 74.115.187.62

tres
Warcrafter - [grafixfangamer1 at sbcglobal dot net]
Video games are my cocaine!
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 12:33:03 am EDT from 69.231.225.167

second
oneuke
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 12:06:49 am EDT from 66.167.110.112

First?
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75 at gmail dot com]
"We are who we choose to be... now CHOOSE!" -The Green Goblin
posted @ Mon, Sep 3, 2007 12:01:07 am EDT from 71.62.204.109