Things to keep in mind when concocting behind-the-scenes conspiracy theories...

[TinkerSpider]

That's literally the opposite of what he admitted in his suicide letter. Like, have whatever feelings you want about the dude, but don't blatantly lie about his freakin' suicide note.

Piskor, 41, apologized for the messages in his note and said he never should have communicated with the teenager. He also addressed separate allegations from another artist, saying that they had a consensual sexual relationship.

[The Twilight Mexican]

Piskor, 41, apologized for the messages in his note and said he never should have communicated with the teenager. He also addressed separate allegations from another artist, saying that they had a consensual sexual relationship.

Now show us where in his actual suicide note that he admitted to what you claimed. Because "I’m so sorry for being so stupid. I definitely should never have talked with Molly D" is not the same as "I am admitting to grooming Molly D" -- particularly when coupled with "I promise my innocence," "There was no way I’d have a 17 yr old stay at my place," "it wasn’t even with sex in mind but simply saying that there’s a bed here to crash like the kindness that was given to me a bunch of times when I was starting out," "My intentions were never nefarious with her or anybody," etc., etc., etc.

Again, feel however you want about the dude, but to deny him the dignity of what he actually said in his own suicide note is uncool AF.

[TinkerSpider]

Now show us where in his actual suicide note that he admitted to what you claimed. Because "I’m so sorry for being so stupid. I definitely should never have talked with Molly D" is not the same as "I am admitting to grooming Molly D" -- particularly when coupled with "I promise my innocence," "There was no way I’d have a 17 yr old stay at my place," "it wasn’t even with sex in mind but simply saying that there’s a bed here to crash like the kindness that was given to me a bunch of times when I was starting out," "My intentions were never nefarious with her or anybody," etc., etc., etc.

Again, feel however you want about the dude, but to deny him the dignity of what he actually said in his own suicide note is uncool AF.

He admitted he shouldn't have approached an underage woman.

Denying the victims their dignity and veracity is even more uncool.

And this is the last I will say on the subject, which is now highly off topic.


If you are having thoughts of suicide, call or text 988 to reach the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline or go to SpeakingOfSuicide.com/resources for a list of additional resources.

[shooshoomanjoe]

Now show us where in his actual suicide note that he admitted to what you claimed. Because "I’m so sorry for being so stupid. I definitely should never have talked with Molly D" is not the same as "I am admitting to grooming Molly D" -- particularly when coupled with "I promise my innocence," "There was no way I’d have a 17 yr old stay at my place," "it wasn’t even with sex in mind but simply saying that there’s a bed here to crash like the kindness that was given to me a bunch of times when I was starting out," "My intentions were never nefarious with her or anybody," etc., etc., etc.

Again, feel however you want about the dude, but to deny him the dignity of what he actually said in his own suicide note is uncool AF.

He was trying to groom the artist. A man in his late 30s doesn't invite an underage girl to spend the night with him, calling her babygirl and asking if she'll rat him out of he breaks the law.

[Majesty]

Dan's post wasn't directed at the bullshitters.

It was advice for normal, reasonable people, on how to detect bullshit.

This should be framed.

[The Twilight Mexican]

He was trying to groom the artist. A man in his late 30s doesn't invite an underage girl to spend the night with him, calling her babygirl and asking if she'll rat him out of he breaks the law.

You seem to be of the impression you came across a different discussion in here than the one you did come across.

[SturdyMike89]

You seem to be of the impression you came across a different discussion in here than the one you did come across.

Yeah, unraveling the story of Ed Piskor, what he did, and the fact that he took his life requires a very very deep conversation that to be honest is not really the point of this thread. Don't get me wrong, I think it is important to talk about, but I think we are getting lost in the weeds here. Suffice it to say, whatever he did, it cannot be stressed enough that any loss of life is sad.

[Dan Slott]

Quick fact (for those that like to live in an alternate reality):

The story in Amazing Fantasy #1000 was a story I pitched. It wasn't "assigned". I pitched it.
It features a 60 year old Peter Parker who is clearly married to MJ.
She isn't just hinted at (when she calls him "Tiger"). She's MJ.
There is literally a line of dialogue from Peter's thought captions-- when he thinks he's dying-- when he says he wishes he could see MJ one more time.

SHE'S MJ.

[Dan Slott]

It just astounds me how much daily effort (sometimes multiple times a day) that some people can spend telling bold straight up lies about comic book creators and the work they do. Like that AF #1000 story. All the info you need is right there IN the words and pictures on the page. It takes a special level of hate-fueled tunnel vision to ignore what's actually on the page and to just say what you feel was there instead.

[WebLurker]

Quick fact (for those that like to live in an alternate reality):

The story in Amazing Fantasy #1000 was a story I pitched. It wasn't "assigned". I pitched it.
It features a 60 year old Peter Parker who is clearly married to MJ.
She isn't just hinted at (when she calls him "Tiger"). She's MJ.
There is literally a line of dialogue from Peter's thought captions-- when he thinks he's dying-- when he says he wishes he could see MJ one more time.

SHE'S MJ.

It just astounds me how much daily effort (sometimes multiple times a day) that some people can spend telling bold straight up lies about comic book creators and the work they do. Like that AF #1000 story. All the info you need is right there IN the words and pictures on the page. It takes a special level of hate-fueled tunnel vision to ignore what's actually on the page and to just say what you feel was there instead.

To quote the old Parks and Rec meme, I don't know what this post is and at this point I'm too afraid to ask.

[Alex_Of_X]

Dan, thoughts/feelings on Red Dwarf coming back, and its influence on your work?

[SturdyMike89]

Quick fact (for those that like to live in an alternate reality):

The story in Amazing Fantasy #1000 was a story I pitched. It wasn't "assigned". I pitched it.
It features a 60 year old Peter Parker who is clearly married to MJ.
She isn't just hinted at (when she calls him "Tiger"). She's MJ.
There is literally a line of dialogue from Peter's thought captions-- when he thinks he's dying-- when he says he wishes he could see MJ one more time.

SHE'S MJ.

Thanks Dan for bringing the thread back to it's original point. It was getting... off putting for a minute there.

[WebLurker]

Thanks Dan for bringing the thread back to it's original point. It was getting... off putting for a minute there.

Dunno; was finding the "ask Dan Slott aything" tangents more interesting than the original point.

[SturdyMike89]

Dunno; was finding the "ask Dan Slott aything" tangents more interesting than the original point.

Oh no, the "ask Dan Slott anything" part is cool, don't get me wrong. I was talking about the conversation about a popular comic book creator who recently died that ran on up above. The conversation made no sense with this thread and got real uncomfortable IMHO. I love being able to get responses from comic book creators. It is one of the main reasons I joined this community

[Dan Slott]

There's a veritable truck load of bad takes on a cover that was released this past week.

And the frustrating thing: Months from now, when the actual comic comes out and NONE of these theories, insinuations, and bad takes will pan out... everyone who made them won't give the matter a second thought. None of them will say, "Wow. I was 100% wrong about that." None of them will say, "I disparaged the writer of that book for no apparent reason or for anything valid whatsoever." Every single one of those people will fly right past it and move on to a new (and equally meritless) outrage of the day.

Why?

Because this is the internet, that's why. :-P

I remember when the solicits and news for AF #1000 came out. And a certain group of detractors saw that I was writing a story that would, as editorial put it, "explore the enduring love between Peter Parker and Mary Jane Watson in a story set in the far future."

That made a bunch of my haters' heads explode-- in real time-- all over social media.
There was sturm and drang over why me (of ALL people) was going to be the person to write THAT story.

The answer was simple: It was a story I WANTED TO TELL. It was THE story I pitched to the office when they told me they were going to do AF #1000 and what kind of anthology that was going to be.

Jump to later: The issue came out and people actually LIKED the story.

Then came the scramble of new theories: I didn't write it. Someone else HAD to have written it.
No. Wait. It was a story that editorial had to tell and I was FORCED to write it.
Stop. Hold on. I DID write it, but I made sure to make the woman in the story ambiguous so that it didn't HAVE to be MJ.
(Even though she calls him "Tiger" in the issue-- and she's specifically referred to AS "MJ" on the page.)

The sheer amount of BS online pumped out on a daily basis from straight up haters is a never ending source of befuddlement to me. I have DRASTICALLY pulled back on my online interaction with this nonsense (usually limiting it to this very thread). Eventually, I'll pull back from here too. It's just never going to stop, so why bother? :-/