Websnark

Comment from: TroyHickman posted at October 2, 2005 2:01 PM

Just change the name to WebStark and get it over with, man...

:)

Comment from: theusual posted at October 2, 2005 2:48 PM

Then would we have Starky sleeping in a recliner in the corner?

Comment from: kirabug posted at October 2, 2005 3:08 PM

I'm having trouble picturing the General snoozing in a corner hugging his blanky.

Comment from: Egarwaen posted at October 2, 2005 3:25 PM

Or you could make it "The Adventures of John Snark". :)

Comment from: Zaq posted at October 2, 2005 4:22 PM

And that is how the requested crossover with Dinosaur Comics will be made possible.

See? It all comes full circle.

Comment from: JackSlack posted at October 2, 2005 4:44 PM

Ahem. :coughs to above posters: :)

Eric, it's good stuff, even if it makes the whole thing feel even more Qwantz-like. It's also the best written one since the first one. I was learnin' stuff!

Comment from: Wednesday White posted at October 2, 2005 4:52 PM

Lettering hard to read on haibane. Have not tried on hotaru.

Comment from: SeanH posted at October 2, 2005 5:00 PM

So, Eric! I hear you have a new webcomic! Why don't you tell us about it?

Comment from: Lyndon W posted at October 2, 2005 5:11 PM

Wait, I thought Benedict was a bad guy. I'm so confused! =(

Comment from: Eric Burns posted at October 2, 2005 5:36 PM

Lyndon -- you got the point of the strip. ;)

Part of the reason Benedict Arnold's treason has become so intensely infamous is because he wasn't a run of the mill commander before. He was one of the greatest heroes of the Revolution up until that point. Imagine if you will George S. Patton driving Rommel out of Africa, and then suddenly hatching a scheme to sell out the Allied mechanized lines to Germany and Italy.

Comment from: Archon Divinus posted at October 2, 2005 5:39 PM

The archives are really annoying.

Comment from: Paul Gadzikowski posted at October 2, 2005 5:55 PM

Fine, I give. Stark's on my morning trawl as of tomorrow morning.

What? The new format? It's okay, better than the other one, whatever.

Comment from: Ardaniel posted at October 2, 2005 5:57 PM

The archives are really annoying.

Ah, the cut-and-thrust of rigorous intellectual debate founded in reasoned critique. Just why I come to the site every day.

Comment from: Dave Van Domelen posted at October 2, 2005 6:08 PM

Ard: Well, the archive IS infinite-frelling-canvas. :)

Comment from: SeanH posted at October 2, 2005 6:08 PM

They are, though. Does every strip loading at once not annoy you? It annoys me.

The first I heard of Benedict Arnold's treason was actually a reference to it on The Simpsons. Homer has been captured by the Mafia, and in desperation pretends to be somebody else, only to find that the Mafia have a reason to hate everybody he claims to be. Eventually he gets to:

Homer: "I'm Benedict Arnold!"Fat Tony:"The same Benedict Arnold that tried to sell West Point to the hated British?"

Comment from: SeanH posted at October 2, 2005 6:10 PM

Crap, I typo'd the r out of the "br" tag.

Comment from: Ian K. posted at October 2, 2005 8:02 PM

I like it.

The 2x3 layout makes it feel lighter, more fun. I'm digging, definitely digging.

Comment from: miyaa posted at October 2, 2005 8:22 PM

Ever thought of expanding into using pictures of other national monuments? Grant's Tomb or the Gateway Arch would be really hilarious.

Or for irony: the Space Needle.

Comment from: Robert Hutchinson posted at October 2, 2005 8:28 PM

It's about ten pixels too wide for my ancient monitor resolution.

(I needed another webcomic in my "Daily" group, anyway. Only had four.)

Comment from: lucastds posted at October 2, 2005 9:12 PM

won't... read... it...

gr. i clicked.

the new layout does indeed look like qwantz.

Comment from: Eric Burns posted at October 2, 2005 9:19 PM

Well, it's 800x600 and... er, in panels. So, yeah.

Comment from: Merus posted at October 2, 2005 10:42 PM

I probably won't be adding Stark to my daily list, for the simple reason that I can come here and get to Stark from the most recent post.

Comment from: lucastds posted at October 2, 2005 10:48 PM

^ haha. nicely pointed out.

I too find that archive system annoying. Why does it post all of them on one page?

Comment from: Eric Burns posted at October 2, 2005 11:07 PM

Merus -- I promise to not inconvenience you with my enthusiasm further, for a while.

Lucas -- that's how Joey Manley had Modern Tales et al set up. He has a more traditional style as an action item for later on.

Comment from: Merus posted at October 3, 2005 10:21 AM

Sorry, Eric - I didn't want to press the point, and I know you're enthusiastic about the new project and it's your damn blog and I'm merely spectating and don't even keep a blog or webcomic so I hardly have a right to tell you what to do.

And you're writing about webcomics, so no-one can fault you for that. (Although I'd drink up a post on flooring, personally. Love the writing style.)

And I am not going to mention Websnark plugging for Stark compared to Gossamer Commons. I've been enough of a selfish sunnafabitch already.

Comment from: alschroeder posted at October 3, 2005 10:33 AM

Eric....

I clicked on Stark once, when you first mentioned it.

'Twasn't impressed. Not bad, not my thing. I don't read Dinosaur comics, either.

With every repeated reference, I get more and more annoyed, and less inclined to click on it.

I am sick to death of mentions of Stark. If you WANTED to drive us away from it, you're doing a good job.

Sorry. It's your weblog, and you're not getting paid, but if your goal has been to drive up traffic for Stark, you've failed dismally in my case. ---Al

Comment from: Eric Burns posted at October 3, 2005 10:44 AM

Sorry, Eric - I didn't want to press the point, and I know you're enthusiastic about the new project and it's your damn blog and I'm merely spectating and don't even keep a blog or webcomic so I hardly have a right to tell you what to do.

Of course you do.

Of course you do.

That is entirely the point of a comments system in the first place, Merus. You didn't do anything wrong.

If I hit saturation, and was snippier than I should have been in my response, that isn't your problem -- that's mine. You go on speaking your mind however you want to do so. All right?

I am enthusiastic about this -- mostly because I'm having a lot of fun with it, and when I'm enjoying something... well, I want to tell folks over here about what I'm enjoying.

(And Gossamer Commons got a ton of plugs when it first started too -- at the same time, the rampup to GC was very slow in comparison. Lots of teasers, spread out over time. John Stark went from 0 to full on webcomic in very little time, so the whole process took place in a compressed amount of Websnark space.)

Anyway. It'll be a long time before there's another Stark post.

(The downside to that, of course, is that if I have a good amount of "setup" energy going to Stark, that will likely mean fewer posts on 'Snark proper. But with the fullness of time, that too shall be resolved.)

Comment from: Eric Burns posted at October 3, 2005 10:46 AM

Al -- I'm all for your comment, and I take your point. I honestly do.

At the same time... given that you've already acknowledged that Stark's style isn't your cup of tea in the first place... you do realize I wouldn't be counting on your readership in the first place, right? ;)

(And yes, I recognize that isn't your actual point. Still, that leapt right out at me.)

Comment from: UrsulaV posted at October 3, 2005 11:16 AM

Jeez, give the man break, people. He's trying something new, he thinks it's neat, it's about as related to webcomics as webcomickery can possibly get, and he's excited by it. If it's not your cup 'o tea, fine, wonderful. If we get all John Stark all the time for a month, fine, but three or four posts is nothin'. I've done ten times that number on interesting parasites on the squirrels seen in the backyard. This is nothin'.

Sorry, I realize people have every right to comment and express their disinterest, and as Voltaire didn't actually say, I'll defend to the death their right to do so, but I feel obligated to point out that I have never understood the mindset whereby one must make one's disinterest into a club in order to beat the artist about the head and shoulders with it. It just strikes me as not-very-classy.

Comment from: larksilver posted at October 3, 2005 1:46 PM

There I was, all set to say "chill out everybody," and Ursula went and said it for me. So, I'll say "what she said, and hooray for classy UrsulaV!" and add this:

It's stuff like this, where we can see Eric get all excited about a new project, that's part of the fun of the 'snarky experience for me. It humanizes things for me. I'm constantly reminded that the folks who write (and read) websnark are way smarter and vastly more talented than I am; to watch Eric (or Weds!) get all giddy over a new project, as I tend to do, is refreshing.

So I say, rave on, hon. We're not just your readers, we're a community, right? That makes us sorta-kinda-internet friendy people, and friends let other friends babble as need be. See, look, I just proved it by babbling at you. hehe

Comment from: SeanH posted at October 3, 2005 2:30 PM

As something of an annotation, I was just teasing; I don't mind the Stark posts. Just sayin'.

Comment from: alschroeder posted at October 3, 2005 6:25 PM

Eric *Grin* You got me. If I don't follow Dinoaaur Comics, I won't follow Stark.

But I was trying to follow WEBSNARK---and when every other entry recently is about STark---

When you did Gossamer Commmons (which I love and continue to love, BTW) you posted a couple of things about it, and then cooled it, with only an occasional Commons-related piece.

Occasional, as opposed to all the time, with both Commons and Stark, would be best.

Oh, and best of luck with the write a novel project.---Al

Comment from: Chris Anthony posted at October 3, 2005 7:43 PM

See, I like reading the behind-the-scenes stuff about The Adventures of Brigadier General John Stark, and since the page itself doesn't seem to have a "news" section, these posts are where I get that.

Plus, I think that "last unless it's not" is a fun running gag, like unto "submitted without comment", which we haven't seen in a while anyway.

All of which is to say that your mileage may vary, and when one says "[this] would be best", it behooves one to remember, and make clear that one remembers, that one is not speaking for everybody.

Comment from: larksilver posted at October 6, 2005 1:38 PM

Oooh, well put, Chris! And you used "behooves" in a sentence. Bonus points!

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: