The C2E2 Spider-man 60th Panel, some interesting things been said.

[RJT]

The first issue of the new run had the book's editor asking people to give the new run a chance while acknowledging people would be unhappy about Peter & MJ being broken up. This is not a thing you do if you think the Peter x MJ shippers are not a sizable part of the audience.

Conspiracy theorists will always find that any and all evidence supports their conspiracy theory.

[Kevinroc]

Conspiracy theorists will always find that any and all evidence supports their conspiracy theory.

How can you hold a conversation with someone when they call you a conspiracy theorist for pointing out a thing that is actually in the book?

[RJT]

How can you hold a conversation with someone when they call you a conspiracy theorist for pointing out a thing that is actually in the book?

I'm taking issue with your interpretation of what is in the book.

Why haven't you countered any of the evidence that I presented that most readers do not care about the Spider-marriage one way or the other?

[Kevinroc]

I'm taking issue with your interpretation of what is in the book.

Why haven't you countered any of the evidence that I presented that most readers do not care about the Spider-marriage one way or the other?

This is a weird thing to say in a thread about the Editor-in-chief apologizing to a room full of people at C2E2 that Peter and MJ won't be getting married again.

[RJT]

This is a weird thing to say in a thread about the Editor-in-chief apologizing to a room full of people at C2E2 that Peter and MJ won't be getting married again.

See what I mean? He didn't apologize. You've imagined that and now are presenting it as real. According to the report "I can't give you the nice answer that you want, unfortunately." Also, how many people are in that room? A few hundred? Less? How many of them indicated that they wanted Peter and Mary Jane married out of that group? Even if it was every single one, that's still only a fraction of the Spider-Man readership, and it's a self-selective group: the kind of people who will pay money to go sit in a room and listen to the editor in chief talk about Spider-Man. It still doesn't prove that a "sizable" part of Spider-Man fans care one way or the other about the marriage.

[Kevinroc]

See what I mean? He didn't apologize. You've imagined that and now are presenting it as real. According to the report "I can't give you the nice answer that you want, unfortunately." Also, how many people are in that room? A few hundred? Less? How many of them indicated that they wanted Peter and Mary Jane married out of that group? Even if it was every single one, that's still only a fraction of the Spider-Man readership, and it's a self-selective group: the kind of people who will pay money to go sit in a room and listen to the editor in chief talk about Spider-Man. It still doesn't prove that a "sizable" part of Spider-Man fans care one way or the other about the marriage.

You're trying to argue semantics. "I can't give you the nice answer you want, unfortunately" to the people in the room cheering and applauding to the idea of Peter and MJ marrying again can absolutely be classified as an apology.

And if they weren't trying to appeal to Peter x MJ shippers, the editor-in-chief wouldn't have said that "we will never disregard or disrespect Mary Jane."

[RJT]

You're trying to argue semantics. "I can't give you the nice answer you want, unfortunately" to the people in the room cheering and applauding to the idea of Peter and MJ marrying again can absolutely be classified as an apology.

And if they weren't trying to appeal to Peter x MJ shippers, the editor-in-chief wouldn't have said that "we will never disregard or disrespect Mary Jane."

Or, hear me out, it's not the editor-in-chief's position to disregard or disrespect any of his company's characters.
You are hearing what you want to hear, not what is actually being expressed.
And why isn't Renew Your Vows still being published? It has a "sizable" target audience.

[Kevinroc]

Or, hear me out, it's not the editor-in-chief's position to disregard or disrespect any of his company's characters.
You are hearing what you want to hear, not what is actually being expressed.
And why isn't Renew Your Vows still being published? It has a "sizable" target audience.

Why isn't Ghost-Spider/Spider-Gwen still being published? Doesn't she have a "sizable" target audience?

(No need to point out the recent mini. My point is this is an argument made in bad faith. Lots of characters don't have their own title these days. Ms. Marvel doesn't have her own title these days despite headlining a recent series on Disney Plus.)

[RJT]

Why isn't Ghost-Spider/Spider-Gwen still being published? Doesn't she have a "sizable" target audience?

I'm going to guess no? I don't know how that's relevant. I'm not on these boards caterwauling that Marvel isn't publishing Spider-Gwen comics because even though she has a sizable audience who adore her, Marvel Comics is part of a conspiracy to keep fans from getting what they want. I just assume they aren't publishing Spider-Gwen comics because Spider-Gwen comics weren't selling well enough to justify their publication.

[Kevinroc]

I'm going to guess no? I don't know how that's relevant. I'm not on these boards caterwauling that Marvel isn't publishing Spider-Gwen comics because even though she has a sizable audience who adore her, Marvel Comics is part of a conspiracy to keep fans from getting what they want. I just assume they aren't publishing Spider-Gwen comics because Spider-Gwen comics weren't selling well enough to justify their publication.

My point is your argument is made in bad faith.

[RJT]

Why isn't Ghost-Spider/Spider-Gwen still being published? Doesn't she have a "sizable" target audience?

(No need to point out the recent mini. My point is this is an argument made in bad faith. Lots of characters don't have their own title these days. Ms. Marvel doesn't have her own title these days despite headlining a recent series on Disney Plus.)

I replied before your edit. It isn't a bad faith argument. Ms. Marvel is a wonderful character, and has a Disney + show, but her book wasn't selling particularly well by the end, so they stopped publishing it. Marvel wouldn't purposely not publish a Ms. Marvel ongoing comic if it they stood to make tons of money from it, especially not for almost fifteen years, which is how long Marvel has been publishing Spider-Man comics post-OMD.
In your worldview, Marvel is purposely losing money every month for a decade and a half, across three different editors-in-chief, just to spite you.

[Matt Rat]

Why haven't you countered any of the evidence?

Supposition isn't evidence.

Marvel wouldn't purposely not publish a Ms. Marvel ongoing comic if it they stood to make tons of money from it, especially not for almost fifteen years, which is how long Marvel has been publishing Spider-Man comics post-OMD. .

And in all that time Marvel have not stopped publishing marriage stories, 20 years for 616, but 33 going on 35 years if you count all the alternate universec iterations, and now Lost Hunt restores the marriage to 616 using a period setting, rather than cut it out of that reality altogether.

They're also reprinting the wedding album this year.

The post-OMD era has never had a chance to walk or even run without the marriage being five steps ahead of it.

[Kevinroc]

I replied before your edit. It isn't a bad faith argument. Ms. Marvel is a wonderful character, and has a Disney + show, but her book wasn't selling particularly well by the end, so they stopped publishing it. Marvel wouldn't purposely not publish a Ms. Marvel ongoing comic if it they stood to make tons of money from it, especially not for almost fifteen years, which is how long Marvel has been publishing Spider-Man comics post-OMD.
In your worldview, Marvel is purposely losing money every month for a decade and a half, across three different editors-in-chief, just to spite you.

I like how you tell me my worldview when I have repeatedly said on this forum that I never expect the marriage to return. But do go on.

[RJT]

But why do you think the marriage won't be returning?

[RJT]

I like how you tell me my worldview when I have repeatedly said on this forum that I never expect the marriage to return. But do go on.

But why do you think the marriage won't be returning?