Forum    Search    FAQ

Board index » Sluggy Related Forums » Reactions




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ] 
 
Author Message
 Post Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2021 9:16 am 
Offline
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 12:41 am
Posts: 58
GUIGUI wrote:

ong wrote:
(...)if Wilcott was cheating on her constantly, that would explain her behaviour today. (...).

I am not sure Wilcott actually cheated on her, at least not at this point in the comic, but I think Kira was intentionally creating a wedge between them precisely because she had a thing for him.


You're right, rereading it it's not clear whether there's cheating going on or if this is just two colleagues going out to eat. But Kira is up to something, which (specspecspec).

But I can't shake off the feeling that Lorna isn't fully imagining things, maybe something happened in the past.

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2021 11:35 am 
Offline
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 8:38 pm
Posts: 414
ong wrote:
Did we just get an "origin story" on why Lorna was always so tough and judgy? I mean, if Wilcott was cheating on her constantly, that would explain her behaviour today. I love the recasting of a character that, let's be honest, was a bit of a stereotype and a one-bit joke at the beginning.

Was Lorna ever not just a one-bit joke? I kinda figured that's the reason she silently disappeared from the strip after the Dr. Laura reference stopped being topical.

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2021 6:04 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2021 11:18 am
Posts: 32
I have always assumed that Lorna was originally only intended as a one-off parody of Dr. Laura and that Pete made her Riff's mother just because it was funny (not intending to make this part of any wider mythology).

I say this because just about all the Lorna stuff happens before the KZK or Oasis arcs, which is when Pete really seemed to start planning long-term. Still, it's cool to have her tied back in now!

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2021 1:45 pm 
Offline
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 8:38 pm
Posts: 414
I think I remember some interview from years ago in which Pete stated that his original plan had been to have a revolving-door cast, but he ended up getting too attached to the characters. So yeah, he probably wasn't even planning to have Riff around for that long, much less develop complex mythologies around his family.

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Fri Nov 26, 2021 4:09 am 
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 12:28 am
Posts: 89
superhunnybear wrote:
(I don’t think this really qualifies as ‘spec’…)
Given the timeline (and location) of the current comics, I suspect we may soon [have some possible spec appear] (and likely led to [some more spec as well -Z])

Short answer: Whatever... seems pedantic in this case...

TLDR answer:
Considering that the two 'spec' blocks above are obscuring are actually only referring to time periods, events and characters that we already know about from past strips, I am surprised it was actually blocked!
Is it really spec to say that some details or answers that we had hoped to see more info - without actually describing a speculative 'this is the detail I think will be revealed', but instead saying 'Pete has brought us (via a look back in time that we know only spotty details about so far, and boy oh boy, doesn't it look like we should know more very soon?!?
(I'm being especially vague on purpose, but by the same standard, perhaps even this gripe is likely considered spec, as would posting [word for word] 'soon we will see the characters we like in another installment of the strip doing things that we like to see them do'...

Ok, in reality, not really upset, just bemused that the original was marked as spec and spec.

And, thinking that the discussion about what should be considered spec could use a bright and clear definition that is easily accessible, or better, a review about how strict things should be when it comes to avoiding spec here.

To that end (and as an experiment in finding out what happens to the post here in Reactions), I am going to copy this post and repost it in the Megaspec, (before it can possibly be marked as spec and neutered here ...) and see if it prompts meaningful response, debate, or just sinks like a lead balloon (and not the one on Mythbusters... oops! should have posted a spoiler warning for late-arriving fans of Mythbusters!)

After doing that, I am heading to bed, because I suspect that the (spec about an astronomical object) will (spec about an event that hasn't happened yet, even though it has occured daily since time memorial) to start a new day.

PS: I actually do appreciate your efforts, Z! This situation just struck me as very silly, but it at least prompted me to think about what spec is or isn't (or should be or not...)

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Fri Nov 26, 2021 10:19 am 
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 5:44 am
Posts: 1776
superhunnybear wrote:
And, thinking that the discussion about what should be considered spec could use a bright and clear definition that is easily accessible, or better, a review about how strict things should be when it comes to avoiding spec here.


Spec[ulation] is a potential spoiler for someone else. Do you (think) you solved a mystery, or can predict what's going to happen next? Good for you! But don't post it here. Let others enjoy the ride. It may be obvious to you, but it may not be for others.

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Fri Nov 26, 2021 10:49 am 
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 12:28 am
Posts: 89
StatisticMan wrote:
superhunnybear wrote:
(I don’t think this really qualifies as ‘spec’…)
Given the timeline (and location) of the current comics, I suspect we may soon get to see the accident that killed ‘ancient’ Tombsy… (and likely led to Wilcott’s lengthy - to the point that Riff assumed he died, too - disappearance.)


I think that is highly unlikely taking into account that Torg has childhood memories of Riffs father.
Him disappearing in 1973 would imply that Riff and Torg were born in the 60s...

Yeah, maybe the math doesn't work, but then what IS the current year in the strip? It might get retconned, but clearly there are periods where a year isn't a year (more so with holidays not always acknowledge in the strip in later years...)
I acknowledge that this doesn't appear to be enough of a factor to fully account for how old Riff and Torg were when they disappeared.
(Heck, I acknowledge that all facts related to ages may be clear as crystal in the strip over the years, and i just didn't pick up on it...)

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Fri Nov 26, 2021 3:00 pm 
Member of the Fraternal Order of the Emergency Pants
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2003 12:00 am
Posts: 3173
AOL: Dodger724
Location: Relative Obscurity
Spec is whatever the Reactions mods DEEM it to be.

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Fri Nov 26, 2021 7:50 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 12:28 am
Posts: 89
Spirantz wrote:
superhunnybear wrote:
(I don’t think this really qualifies as ‘spec’…)
Given the timeline (and location) of the current comics, I suspect...


If you look up spec in a dictionary, this would be the provided example.

Yes, yes it is...,

That is one of the key points of contention in the later raving lunatic-style diatribe that I posted here and in the Megaspec thread...

But no worries, I specifically did ask for opinions and corrections, even knowing a serious rebuke-fest could result! Rather than dreading it, I am going to lean into the 'experience' (this time, at least.)

Thanks, Spirantz! Have a great day!


Last edited by superhunnybear on Fri Nov 26, 2021 8:10 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top 
   
 Post Posted: Fri Nov 26, 2021 7:52 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 12:28 am
Posts: 89
Spirantz wrote:
I am very much waiting to see this Riffington's family Origin story.

Well done. No spec involved. If only I had approached my post that way...

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Fri Nov 26, 2021 8:09 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 12:28 am
Posts: 89
Dodger77 wrote:
Spec is whatever the Reactions mods DEEM it to be.


Yes it is.

But I don't consider Zillitain to be a power-hungry moderator (right?) and maybe he could be open to reconsidering where the line of 'deemed as spec, not deemed as spec' lies when dealing with Reactions. Or not.

Granted, maintaining a zero-tolerance policy IS much easier for a moderator than having to spend time judging what is TOO specific vs what is just vague enough...

In any case, I do thank you for the feedback, Dodger77!

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Fri Nov 26, 2021 8:17 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 8:31 pm
Posts: 51
ong wrote:
Did we just get an "origin story" on why Lorna was always so tough and judgy? I mean, if Wilcott was cheating on her constantly, that would explain her behaviour today. I love the recasting of a character that, let's be honest, was a bit of a stereotype and a one-bit joke at the beginning.


Dr Lorna was a thinly veiled reference to Dr Laura Schlessinger, a real person who made her name by giving out tough love advice on the radio, similar to Dr Lorna

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Sat Nov 27, 2021 10:52 pm 
Senior Community Staff
Senior Community Staff
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 11:07 pm
Posts: 5764
Location: Someplace other than where I am.
If something is speculation or not, is not the easiest at times.

What has Pete told us, or not told us? What does he what us to think or assume? What is he misleading us on? These are a few of the things I have to mull over in my mind while reading Reactions. Usually I can pretty quickly decide if something falls within my criteria for spec or not.

As for superhunnybear... I couldn't tell immediately, but it just felt.."off" to me. So after a while of going back and forth, it seemed more like a gray-area due to somewhat how you said it, so I ended up deciding to treat it as spec.

Top 
   
 Post Posted: Sun Nov 28, 2021 9:28 pm 
User avatar
Offline
Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 12:28 am
Posts: 89
Zillatain wrote:
If something is speculation or not, is not the easiest at times.

What has Pete told us, or not told us? What does he what us to think or assume? What is he misleading us on? These are a few of the things I have to mull over in my mind while reading Reactions. Usually I can pretty quickly decide if something falls within my criteria for spec or not.

As for superhunnybear... I couldn't tell immediately, but it just felt.."off" to me. So after a while of going back and forth, it seemed more like a gray-area due to somewhat how you said it, so I ended up deciding to treat it as spec.

Thanks, Z!
You do a great job here, even if I was surprised at the time on the spec-block.
(Regarding my thesis/rants(s)... I sure hope you know that I meant to cast no shade on you. Long/short is that I ultimately agree that my post HAD crossed a spec threshold in a few ways...)

Top 
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ] 

Board index » Sluggy Related Forums » Reactions


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

 
 

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: