I know I have a bunch of old webcomics that featured versions of these Dumbing of Age characters. That’s my own fault. It was gonna create confusion, but I figgered the benefits outweighed the downsides. And I still believe they do. I wouldn’t be nearly as excited about this comic otherwise, as I am writing about old friends.
But, dudes, when interacting with each other in the comments, let us restrain ourselves sensibly! When folks are commenting on these strips and ask about a character’s motivation in Dumbing of Age, many of these commenting folks are new to this universe! They haven’t read Roomies! or It’s Walky! or Shortpacked! or Joyce and Walky!, and nor should they have to. And so they do not want to be greeted in response with a detailed blow-by-blow account of character X in another webcomic. That is not helping. You are just being confusing and not even answering the question, since there is no answer to the question yet. This isn’t a SPOILERS! thing. It’s a flood of irrelevant information thing.
So, please, I ask of you. Let’s just talk about Dumbing of Age. If you are not talking about Dumbing of Age, there is a good chance I will delete your posts. I am happy that you are contributing, but I value my new readers.
If a new Dumbing of Age reader wants to find my other work on their own initiative, that is perfectly fine and good as well! But my focus on this website is telling this story this way. And I don’t want it muddled unsolicited. Thank you.
Loading ...
Does this include saying it looks like so and so is in the background?
(Sorry if this is a a really dumb question. I’m very OCD and don’t make assumptions easily)
That’s probably fine. I don’t expect people to not recognize characters. I tag them all by name myself anyway, so that’d be a little hypocritical of me. This is more related to how discussions play out.
(Though at this point I don’t think I expect to ever have anyone in a strip and not tag them, so if there’s someone you think you see who isn’t tagged, it’s likely not them. There’s not any more “surprise characters.”)
That’s exactly what someone who has more surprise characters in the wings would say.
You’re not bring back Guns and Marcie?
DAMN YOU WILLIS!
This is just my tale but DoA was my first (I then moved to Joyce and Walky then Shortpacked) but whenever someone would reference another comic they’d paint all these crazy images in my mind and they’re what made me want to read your other comics.
Seconded. I started with DoA, got intrigued by the comments section, went on an archive binge, and ended up buying the J/W full series. I bet I’m not alone. you may wish to reconsider your stance. After all, new readers don’t need to know anything about the past strips to enjoy DoA. Maybe a disclaimer noting this would suffice?
Uh oh. Rules on the internet. RULES ON THE INTERNET!
The polite wording and reasonable requests won’t save anyone! The world will fall and crumble in protest!
Get out while you can, feeble humans! Get out and try and eek out an existence anywhere else, for this land is no longer safe!
The rebels will come. And they’ll bring CAPS LOCK.
In seriousness though, as a long time reader (since around the start of Shortpacked!), I believe that this is a healthy move. It’s helpful to be involved with this universe and only this universe when discussing it in the comments.
However, many of us see it as the Walkyverse (stepping over dimensional lines, in this case), so I can’t really say how the fandom at large thinks of this.
Is CAPS LOCK gay in this continuity?
Seems to be unchanged from every other continuity, so insert your joke based around your prejudices or apparent lack-thereof here.
YES. xD
Man, I’m just here for the chicks.
does this mean i can no longer suggest that amazi-girl is ultra car?
Or refer to Dan Hibiki as M Bison, when he finally shows up?
Thank god. No more comments about a certain character dying in a marshmallow-based explosion or something anymore.
I recall a recent question by one of those new posters asking *specifically* about whether the character appeared in other continuities and what relevance she had.
Obviously that person should have been told to shut up?
I think the problem is not talking about other comics so much just generally being jerks to anyone who hasn’t read every comic ever. (Like yesterday with Mary things got pretty crazy.)
But then again maybe your gravitar makes your comment more hostile than it’s ment to be?
….dude, what is your problem.
My problem, to be succinct, is that I’m a pedant. Generally speaking I don’t think I let it get too out of control and in my interactions on this and other sites I attempt to present myself as funny instead.
However, when I have what I feel is a valid question, I occasionally ask it. This comic recycles character designs/personalities/some histories from your other universe. This is not exactly a secret. So when some ignorant noob explicitly asks about the characters’ roles in those continuities, what would you prefer us to do? Tell them to fuck off? Ignore the post? Hire a hitman to covertly take out the questioner? What?
Second to last sentence: “I don’t want it muddled unsolicited.”
Thanks. I missed that what with the shadow of the rest of the post falling on it.
I think the second to last sentence is great. It’s the paragraph before that which I find… unpalatable.
“So, please, I ask of you. Let’s just talk about Dumbing of Age. If you are not talking about Dumbing of Age, there is a good chance I will delete your posts. I am happy that you are contributing, but I value my new readers.”
This doesn’t feel like a good idea. These are “old friends” to your long time readers, just like they’re “old friends” to you. You have, intentionally or not, created a community, with their own vernacular (ie My FAAAAACE, for a nickel, etc).
You’re asking this community to disregard the relationship that they’ve enjoyed with these characters.
I suggest you change your policy to this:
If you’re going to write about characters as they appeared in previous incarnations, preface the statement as such. People that have only read DoA can then choose to ignore the non DoA material being discussed and be free from confusion, while long time readers can enjoy this community to the fullest, without feeling censored.
I am talking about these kinds of exchanges in particular: http://www.dumbingofage.com/2011/comic/book-1/05-media-rumble/whore-2/#comment-24168
No where in the original post was it asking for a blow-by-blow of another comic strip. But he sure got one! Imagine a universe in which people can actually talk about THIS COMIC and not one from ten years ago. That’s a universe that I want to be in.
If a person starts out their own thread in the comments comparing one version to another version, that bothers me less. Join in on that all you want. I just don’t want the old irrelevant material to be used as a bludgeon on other readers and threads.
I reserve the right to ask people to not derail threads. And when someone is talking about THIS comic and they are smothered with information from ANOTHER comic, that is a derailment. This is THIS COMIC’s website. Please treat it as such.
I did read that exchange, and I’m not saying that you’re wrong. I think “Head Alien’s” error, though, was starting off assuming that Jimmy had read the other fiction. He could just as easily have said:
“We may not know this Ruth’s motivations yet. In another two universes, she first appeared violent and openly hostile…”
Would that have been so wrong?
I don’t think you can reasonably give your readers characters that look the same as characters in other works you’ve done, that have the same names, and almost identical mannerisms, and expect us not to use the previous work as a means of comparison in conversation.
Coincidentally, Head Alien’s assumption turned out to be half-right – Jimmy did actually read Roomies! before, but it’d been so long he forgot. The point still stands regardless, of course, but I agree with Mal that it’s both unrealistic and somewhat patronizing to basically forbid such comparisons if unsolicited. As a new reader I did find them confusing (not in a bad way), for about 10 minutes, after which both banners and comments pointed me to the glory that is the David M Willis comic-multiverse where multiple ships can be cannon at the same time.
At the same time, if the Slipshine Pornlord himself asked us to can it… well, it’s the least I can do. I don’t agree with the sentiment nor the reasoning, but pretty much owe him a beer by now and this is basically his lawn. So I’ll behave myself while on it.
I’m a new reader as well, and I’d like to second some of the sentiments above. I’ve considered stopping reading the comic a few times because I assumed I was missing a lot of subtext from the comments.
However, a link across the top saying “New to the Comic?” with a disclaimer that explains that ‘you don’t have to read the other comics to follow the story, but hey, here’s links to them!’ would have been super helpful. If I had known that from the beginning I wouldn’t have minded the comments at all.
Thanks!
I’ve added a note to that effect on the About page. Thanks!
…does this mean we don’t get to talk about Lawsome?
We can always talk about Lawsome.
Hey, remember that time Mike dropkicked that mailbox? Classic.
What? “Lawsome”? Mr. Willis, can you just create a list of links to all the comics you have written, are writing, and eventually the ones you will write?
I think this post was a great idea. Sure, a little bit of speculation based on old stuff is one thing, but the whole fun of exploring an alternate universe is the fact that it’s self-contained and all the characterization is based on what’s occurring in this continuity.
People speculating in the comments who haven’t referred to anything else are probably trying to have fun speculating about…THIS universe and it totally spoils the fun to have people pointing to a strip in another universe written eight years ago. It’s probably not even truly relevent.
Anyone whining heavily about your request is a killjoy.
I’m glad somebody gets what I’m talking about.
So, to sum up: Don’t talk about the previous comics here even though the entire cast is made up of identical characters with mostly the same names.
So the discussions can now only come from self-contained concepts? I expect the next comments section to be made up of nothing but FAAAAACE, for a nickel, and with his penis, then.
I’m curious if Willis will take this approach with everything in his comics from now on. Maybe all the Batman references in Shortpacked that mention non-Grant Morrison Batman concepts should be removed so as not to confuse newer Batman readers. And of course once the reboot is established in the DCU then all of those comics will have to go too.
So will Willis be asking people not to reference movies, tv shows, and other web comics in the comments? I mean, it only seems fair since I don’t have everyone else’s experience from outside the DoA universe. There are so many references people could make that might make me feel confused, after all.
I wonder if that made my point at all. I was enjoying being a part of the community that’s been built here, but suddenly I feel like I know too much about Willis’s work to be welcome here anymore.
Hmm. I should probably change my gravatar. It might confuse people who haven’t seen Darkwing Duck.
Your attitude makes it really tough to want to try to work with and please you.
That doesn’t make anything I said untrue.
You’re deliberately misinterpreting what he’s asked of everyone and having a grand old game of Chicken Little.
The core of it is: don’t jump down another poster’s throat when they say ‘oh man, I bet Amber totally hates ponies!’ and create a 500 word essay about why that’s wrong with citations from the other three comics. Unless they ask for said essay.
Given that the discussion he linked to above is between two people who had both read Roomies I don’t think I misinterpreted anything.
Everything you said was hyperbole. If you can’t at least argue the terms I actually presented, rather than your multiple slippery-slope doomsday scenarios, then I don’t see the point in trying to make you happy, since you’ve started out being incredibly unfair to me as a human being.
David, I’m not trying to be unfair. I just think that asking those of us who have read your other work not to reference it when talking to each other for fear of offending someone who hasn’t read it is silly. Every bit as silly as the scenarios I posted above. If someone doesn’t get something in the comments then they should ignore it and move on.
I am tired of comments and emails from people who say “Am I missing strips? People keep talking about things I don’t remember.” Or “You say that you don’t need to know anything from your other strips, which is attractive to me, but all of the people talking about the previous strips gives me the opposite impression.”
I’m not talking about a complete lockdown here. Just use some common sense. If people are talking about this strip, talk about this strip. Don’t derail.
I think you need to define “derail”. Because what you posted at the start of this discussion sounds like you’re saying not to reference the previous comics you’ve done at all.
Looking over the rest of the thread I think I get it, but I don’t think it’s going to stop the emails you are getting.
I think his request is perfectly reasonable. Everyone here could use a lot more restraint in their comments. References are fine. Things like, “OMG wat r u doin this ruins this character!!11!1” are something else. It confuses new readers (and whenever I’m new to something I know I get easily confused) and it contradicts the idea that this world is its own and not a part of the other universes. Willis is just asking for everyone to be a little more careful about what they say to people, which is something everyone on the internet should always take care to do.
You seem to have run into a phenomenon that many few writers have to deal with – long-term fans and certain palpable snobbish elements thereof. Basically you’ve created your own Trekkie’s. They can scare newer fans if they really let themselves go… or, they can reel in new fans to all of your other creations – depends.
That sed, your post can be taken as favoring new readers over the old, which can lead to sentiments like: “I was enjoying being a part of the community that’s been built here, but suddenly I feel like I know too much about Willis’s work to be welcome here anymore.”. It can be hard to please both segments since they don’t always overlap… and I think I’ll leave it at that since it’s a open-ended statement.
*only a few (because “many few” is just wrong)
I’m ok with not discussing the other universes in the comments section for DoA, because I never comment/read the comments.
But can I make a request, Mr Willis? Can you please stop spelling ‘figured’ as ‘figgered’? You don’t ‘figger’ something out so in the same vein you cannot have ‘figgered’ something.
I’m not trying to be aggressive/douchy or attack you in any way. This IS criticism, but criticism alongside the fact that I adore everything else about your work.
If your spelling of ‘figured’ is an American convention please feel completely free to disregard my post and throw fart bombs in my general direction.
Yeah, my bad. I often spell words the way I pronounce them, rather than how they’re actually spelled. I know the proper spelling, but choose to type “figger” as a personal stylistic choice.
I don’t hate you for bringing it up, since correcting improper English is always good, but I’m not likely to stop. I like typing it that way! (How I spell it in dialog, meanwhile, depends on the character. Walky definitely says “figger.” Dorothy would say “figure.”)
Okay, now exaggerate it further for how Sal would say it 🙂
See, I think that’s a perfectly valid stylistic choice.
Just one question.
Does this mean that Ethan is gay?
Yeah does that means we have to give up our beloved ‘Is X gay in this continuity?’ meme?!
You can take out lives, but you will never take… our memes!
Memes are a multiversal constant.
I get what Mr. Willis is saying he’s not asking for everyone to completely stop references he would just like people not to go overbored with it by giving lectures on something from his other works if I think I’m getting what he is saying right?
perhaps this is the wrong forum in which to make this request… but I’m gonna do it.
Could at some point we see the DoA characters at a school event in which there is a costumed mascot… and that mascot removes his mask to reveal it is the Faz? as far as whether he speaks, or the other characters know him, or if he has any diagrams handy, I leave that to your artistic discretion. Just the thought of Faz in a giant tiger/bear/eagle mascot costume brings smileys to my face. 😀
Just did some archive-diving and found this. IU doesn’t really have a mascot (but we’ve tried! http://www.idsnews.com/news/inside/story.aspx?id=78737), so this idea sounds… INTRIGUING.
Or impossible. I dunno. Just throwing in my two cents.
I mean, nickel.
I think that while a knowledge of the previous comics is helpful and really enriches the experience, the joy of getting to know these characters strip by strip is not something that should be taken away from new readers– especially because not everyone has a week or more to dedicate to the archives. Life is intense, sleep is great.
I think a lot of comments here are taking David too literally, and people are getting really defensive. I’m sure talking about past continuities is fine, as long as new readers are allowed to discuss the comic too without feeling like they are missing out, or that they are somehow less able to participate in enjoying the comic because they haven’t read Its Walky. Its easy to feel elitest, and there is a large contingency of readers who came here from past comics, but that doesn’t mean the new readers should have to be made to feel left out. I think what David is really trying to say is, lets make sure that EVERYONE can enjoy DoA no matter when they met these characters.
“without feeling like they are missing out” – I agree with everything you sed except that part, because they literally are missing out. Different stories, different life experiences, but the same people.
Then again, this is a bit like arguing in favor of a Trekkie ‘having’ to watch Voyager/the newest series. Because while I may like it, there’s a good chunk of other fans that want to pretend it doesn’t exist and are happier for it. Basically I’m arguing both points are valid? Sounds about right.
Well, this post explains your point pretty well, I think. The only problem I can find, which is a minor one, comes from your characters starting out quite complex, rather than evolving from their two-dimensional starting points in your earlier work. Now correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the central reason your characters can be so complex from the get-go because you HAVE developed them, in R!, etc? In that case, the past comics CAN give new readers into how the character has developed, and it would be ok to point them in that direction or tell them their history?
I guess the answer would be what you’ve already said, that the characters DO stand alone from the old comics, and there really is nothing we can learn from the old comics for DoA!, right?
On a related note, is it presumptuous for old readers to claim they have an insight into a new character, considering the extensive similarities of the new character to a character they’re familiar with?
OK, I re-read what I wrote, and it sounds a little rude, sorry. I really don’t mean to try and contradict you. What I meant to add, I think, is that one of the core parts of DoA! is the break from the old continuity. In that case, You’re rules are perfectly reasonable and I’ll follow them as best I can. Some older readers might feel like that their reading should count for something here, but I disagree. This is All-New, right?
Also, thankyou for the politeness of the post. I know a few authors who wouldn’t be so kind
I’d say it’s more reasonable then presumptuous – it has been consistently shown that many things can be ‘called’ based on previous information from the other universes.
That sed, important details change and nothing will stay exactly the same. Suppose it gives old readers insight to characters, but insight can only count for so much. This is a good thing – it builds on old bonds while not being weighed down by them.
I find elves to be an apt comparison – once you’ve red Tolkien you pretty much know what they are and generally how they go about it, but from story to story they will be… different. Or for a more horrifying comparison, no one saw ‘sparkly’ as being something vampires can be, but we could guess at most other traits because of previous incarnations thereof.
And yes, to his credit I find Willis is remarkably polite at times. Bonus points when it’s under duress. That sed, the post in question can be taken somewhat abrasively by old readers for reasons the comments above have already mentioned.
The David in the It’s Walky continuity would never have made such a rule
Hee hee you are funny