While more than 50% of the time, you would be right, I don't see a problem with the WebSnark link this time. Is there another link to which you're referring?
Eric can have a Paypal button if he wants. Who doesn't? But perhaps I'm not getting the "joke" that is supposed to be post #666, which seems to take up not only a vast majority of the real estate, but even more of the visual attention. How is it a "joke" when he lists the actual stuff he wants sent and provides a method and vehicle? Somehow the "joke" part of it seems to be just an assuagance of guilt for having asked in the first place. Anyway, I don't feel that strongly about this. I've toyed with the idea of setting up an Amazon wishlist myself. Perhaps it was just the red background that overwhelmed me. There was just something abut the "joke" that I didn't get. It's like when you "joke" about killing your boss or asking a girl out, just to kind of get the idea out there without putting yourself on the line.
Regarding not snarking webcomics:
I don't mind the non-webcomic snarking so much, and now I see the mission statement doesn't even mention the word "webcomic." Should it? Just because the Mission Statement says one thing, that doesn't mean that's what "WebSnark is.
It's not my place to dictate the direction of Eric's site, but I feel it set itself up to be something different than "just a blog about whatever's on my mind." I also think it would be unfair of me to expect him to be "on" all the time, or post something every single day (the total amount of writing really is, indeed, colossal). But it feels that maybe WebSnark became something different than the original Mission Statement, and thus we have a certain, unfair but expected, expectation from it, which it felt to me was being neglected. But I guess it was never meant to be there in the first place.
Regarding Gossamer Commons:
have a real problem with this, but not
because of the plugging (of course you should plug your own creations). The problem I have is that the thing I liked most about WebSnark was the "outsider's view." Let's face it, everyone and their grandmother has a webcomic these days. It's always seemed like a virally multiplying, self-consuming field, like some kind of attention-oriented pyramid scheme. I mean, a great deal of the credibility of movie critiques stems from the fact that they don't make movies.
Would you trust a movie review by Steven Spielberg? Or Ed Wood? WebSnark, to me, was one of the first true elements that legitimized
webcomics because finally, it meant webcomics had such attention, that people with no personal involvement were covering it regularly. Now, I'm not disappointed in Eric
for wanting to do it, but I'm disappointed in the net result. Now we're back to the pre-August state of things in which we only talk about ourselves.
Actually, you brought up Nukees both as a nominee for a shortbread award in January, and as an example in a Comixpedia article around the same time, so my memory of not having been snarked since the first month is rather incorrect. But my point wasn't to beg for another spot, but just that I realized that the odds of anyone
being snarked have gone way down, using myself as an example. However, upon reflection, this is certainly expected, as you would necessarily have had a lot more to say when the site was new. If there are seven major points you've always liked about Nukees--well, you've said them, haven't you? It's actually no wonder that there would be an initial flood of commentary, which is then more closely metered into a steady stream. Also, a typical movie reviewer writes maybe one or two reviews a week. Doing four snarks a day isn't something you probably should
Regarding the change in tone:
Upon more research, it may be that the mixing of yours and Wednesday's style has afffected my evaluation. You guys do write a lot
, and I don't think I'm alone in that I often just skim an article rather than digest the full content. The "[w]" is often lost on me. Maybe mini-avatars would be better? Could also be very annoying, though.
Anyway, point being, I still think you're doing a good job, but there were some concerns on my mind as to the direction and I just felt like getting them off my chest. Maybe just one webcomic snark a week, and I'll be happy again.
As you said today, the popularity of the site has skyrocketed, so you're obviously nowhere near a "First and Ten." (Actually, this isn't the right interpretation of your "First and Ten Syndrome." I'm really mixing it up with "Jumping the Shark.")
Speaking of that, it's occured to me that a regularly-updated webcomic's popularity really never goes down
, as far as I know, does it? The only webcomics that lose readers (overall) are the ones that stop updating for long stretches. It's interesting to me. Or perhaps the self-publishing nature means that a cartoonist will usually lose interest and stop doing it long before jumping the shark?