After #FireRickRemender, Can We Have a Real Conversation?

[Punisher007]

I wasn't aware of that. When did it happen?

It's when Kitty joined Excalibur, I believe that Warren Ellis was writing at the time. And I'm also pretty sure that Kitty was meant to be at least 17/18 in that series (she was in a pub on at least one occasion). It's just that when Claremont starting writing her again, he ignored her age in Excalibur and started writing her as a teenager again (because he preferred her to be that age).

[Exciter]

I think you might be right. I meant to extend that to his defenders as well, some of whom (like Brubaker) said some pretty gross stuff. I would say that the same rules apply regardless. If you're a public figure, you have a certain responsibility to respond tactfully. Whatever the case, it's good to know that Remender seems to have learned from what happened last time.

I can respect that opinion, but I do disagree. If you're a politician? Sure. But I don't believe that merely being a public figure, especially someone in entertainment, imposes any special obligation to be respectful when faced with disrespect.

[Fabulous Houseboat]

(I also fully believe that people who are writing editorials or reporting on the news have a certain obligation as well, which was not met in the case of #FireRickRemender)

[Punisher007]

Creators have an obligation to be respectful, no matter how terrible or wrongheaded the criticism. Remender has every right to express his frustration in his private life, but as a public figure, he owes it to the public to maintain a certain level of discourse.

Nope, those other people showed NO respect, or decorum at any point. They said disgusting and horrible things about Remender. They get NO respect, you have to show respect to get it. They brought it on themselves with their BS.

[Fabulous Houseboat]

I can respect that opinion, but I do disagree. If you're a politician? Sure. But I don't believe that merely being a public figure, especially someone in entertainment, imposes any special obligation to be respectful when faced with disrespect.

Do you think that basically any response he would have made would have been justified, given the fact that he was upset for valid reasons? Or is there a line that should not be crossed?

Edit: same question goes to Punisher007

[Exciter]

Do you think that basically any response he would have made would have been justified, given the fact that he was upset for valid reasons? Or is there a line that should not be crossed?

Edit: same question goes to Punisher007

Creators are bound by the same standards as anyone else. Obviously there are some things that shouldn't be said even when upset, but just because you wrote a comic book does not impose any kind of special obligation that requires you to eat a ton of crap and smile about it.

[Shambles]

I think you might be right. I meant to extend that to his defenders as well, some of whom (like Brubaker) said some pretty gross stuff. I would say that the same rules apply regardless. If you're a public figure, you have a certain responsibility to respond tactfully. Whatever the case, it's good to know that Remender seems to have learned from what happened last time.

I do think that the way more and more internet-based news sources rely on clickbait headlines plays a big, big role in this. It moves us all away from a more nuanced conversation and toward a "discourse" that is but a chain of knee-jerk reactions.

Does he really have a responsibility to be tactful. He's not a politician he's a writer, lots of famous writers have been assholes that doesn't mean we can't enjoy their work. If Remender is obnoxious on twitter then surely people can choose not to engage with him there. I value a writers actual work more than their media presence; I might not care for Remenders work personally but I don't want a situation where we screen for writers with pleasant personalities even though their output might be inferior to that of someone less diplomatic.

[Daymare]

Only when heavily moderated or anonymity is removed.

Honestly, this. That would remove the trolling out of it, which tends to ruin the discourse.

Yes. The new trend, especially on these forums is to try and be righteous but passive aggressive in an effort to get others angry enough to get banned. I have severe issues with another person calling me "honey, sweetie, baby" (not ok from either a female or male, but imo it is a direct effort to incite when one male says it to another) when they respond or seeing people who have trolled me always viewing my profile and responding to posts, yet never directly referencing said posts so they do not get banned. This is only here, you open it up to a world of people, especially on areas where the creator may not even know exist and have an effort to get someone to lose their livelihood...it would never happen if you had to post your picture and real name. Honestly, I would not even be on these boards either if that were the case just because of career and family concerns.
In direct regard to Jet, it said her age right on the page, I do not get how someone could be confused.

[RLAAMJR.]

Creators have an obligation to be respectful, no matter how terrible or wrongheaded the criticism. Remender has every right to express his frustration in his private life, but as a public figure, he owes it to the public to maintain a certain level of discourse.

I have to agree with you. But at least,he already apologized. However, his negative comment won't be forgotten quickly.

[emac1790]

Creators have an obligation to be respectful, no matter how terrible or wrongheaded the criticism. Remender has every right to express his frustration in his private life, but as a public figure, he owes it to the public to maintain a certain level of discourse.

I'll say it again, "all human beings have a limit for the shit that they can take". They have no more of an obligation to be respectful than you or I have. Why do people have to bend over and take it because they're a public figure? Somebody insults them and they're supposed to be all like "thank you. give me another"? At the end of the day, it's just words going back and forth. It's not like Remender took a bat to someone's head

I feel that I have to add this because some people on the board question the motives of their fellow posters....
I'm not a fan of Remender's writing. So I don't read it or buy it.

[Punisher007]

Plus, Remender's not a politician, or a diplomat, or a public figure in that sense. He's a writer, and plenty of writers say what they think and don't care about being tactful about it. Alan Moore certainly gives his honest opinion full-on, and it's what has gotten Orson Scott Card into trouble in recent years, etc.

[emac1790]

Yes. The new trend, especially on these forums is to try and be righteous but passive aggressive in an effort to get others angry enough to get banned. I have severe issues with another person calling me "honey, sweetie, baby" (not ok from either a female or male, but imo it is a direct effort to incite when one male says it to another) when they respond or seeing people who have trolled me always viewing my profile and responding to posts, yet never directly referencing said posts so they do not get banned. This is only here, you open it up to a world of people, especially on areas where the creator may not even know exist and have an effort to get someone to lose their livelihood...it would never happen if you had to post your picture and real name. Honestly, I would not even be on these boards either if that were the case just because of career and family concerns.
In direct regard to Jet, it said her age right on the page, I do not get how someone could be confused.

You noticed that too. I guess people want their little victories in life. It's petty. State your opinion, agree or disagree, and move on. It's not like you get money for "winning" a debate on comic book message board.

[Fabulous Houseboat]

Okay, so let me pose the question this way: I agree, he's not a politician or a diplomat. However, he still occupies the public sphere. He represents not only himself as a writer, but the book(s) he writes and the company that signs his paychecks. Also, to a large extent, he represents his fans. Given all that, does he still only have an obligation only to himself and to his emotional responses?

[Exciter]

Okay, so let me pose the question this way: I agree, he's not a politician or a diplomat. However, he still occupies the public sphere. He represents not only himself as a writer, but the book(s) he writes and the company that signs his paychecks. Also, to a large extent, he represents his fans. Given all that, does he still only have an obligation only to himself and to his emotional responses?

Is there some kind of decorum clause in his contract? If not, then he's under no obligation. And if so, it'd be his job's duty to reprimand him.

[emac1790]

Plus, Remender's not a politician, or a diplomat, or a public figure in that sense. He's a writer, and plenty of writers say what they think and don't care about being tactful about it. Alan Moore certainly gives his honest opinion full-on, and it's what has gotten Orson Scott Card into trouble in recent years, etc.

Yes! He is a writer of a comic book that sells tens of thousands of copies a month. He does not make public policy.