Javascript Disabled Detected

You currently have javascript disabled. Several functions may not work. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality.

Toggle shoutbox Shoutbox

@ furrykef	:	(25 July 2015 - 03:35 AM) When was that? Depending on when it was, it might have been a DNS issue. Those should be gone now.
@ Uncle Ben	:	(24 July 2015 - 10:10 PM) on*
@ Uncle Ben	:	(24 July 2015 - 10:10 PM) Red said he couldnt get one
@ furrykef	:	(24 July 2015 - 11:25 AM) Also I still have to figure out how to set up our e-mail accounts on the new host.
@ furrykef	:	(24 July 2015 - 08:19 AM) As soon as I figure out how to restore it. Sorry, I know I said it'd be done by now, but I didn't expect to have to put up with this DNS crap and other issues that popped up.
@ Uncle Ben	:	(24 July 2015 - 07:56 AM) So when's the black theme coming back??
@ Uncle Ben	:	(24 July 2015 - 07:56 AM) "Should"
@ furrykef	:	(24 July 2015 - 07:27 AM) That DNS took longer to propagate properly than I thought it would. Now we should be back for good, though.
@ furrykef	:	(23 July 2015 - 08:48 PM) Or it might be because Bluehost finally got around to that server wipe (one week after we'd asked for it) and that wiped out our DNS settings. I'm not sure which and I don't really care. In any case, we've severed our last ties with Bluehost, so this will not happen again.
@ furrykef	:	(23 July 2015 - 08:08 PM) Looks like Bluehost yanked our DNS since our hosting account expired. That's why the site went down a while ago. But as you can see, it's fixed now.
@ Misk	:	(23 July 2015 - 04:55 PM) No, they do not.
@ furrykef	:	(23 July 2015 - 04:27 AM) The goggles do nothing?
@ Misk	:	(22 July 2015 - 05:50 PM) My eyes.
@ furrykef	:	(22 July 2015 - 12:24 PM) Looks like forum uploads might have been broken since last night. That should be fixed now too.
@ furrykef	:	(22 July 2015 - 01:33 AM) Heh, whoops! Server went down for a few mins when I borked the config. Looks like it's back up now.
@ Uncle Ben	:	(21 July 2015 - 09:09 PM) It looked like a napkin
@ ILOVEVHS	:	(21 July 2015 - 09:04 PM) Fan-fuckin-tastic.
@ furrykef	:	(21 July 2015 - 08:25 PM) As for the beaver picture while the forum was down, I think Tim drew it. On a napkin.
@ furrykef	:	(21 July 2015 - 08:24 PM) No kiddin' about that "Finally!", Shadow. I am so mad at Bluehost for never responding to our support ticket. I submitted it early Friday morning and they still haven't answered it!
@ Uncle Ben	:	(21 July 2015 - 06:37 PM) Maybe he did that himself

Who Should Sonic Be Making Out With?

Started by fishtheimpaler, Mar 12 2008 06:06 PM

Please log in to reply

298 replies to this topic

#241 Guest_bossmanham_*

GUESTS

Posted 09 October 2008 - 05:10 PM

Guys, there's obviously no talking to these two. They are dead set in their Sally hate, even though she's not a crappy Japanese anime chliche. There's nothing you can say to them. I stick with the argument that they are Sonic n00bz.

#242 Mithrandir

Fellow FUSer

Fellow FUSer
205 posts

Gender:Male
Location:Jersey City, NJ

Posted 09 October 2008 - 05:26 PM

Yeah, this would all be a lot simpler if the argument was simply "I like the idea of Sonic being paired up with better than the idea of Sonic being with Sally."

Instead, we're flying in the face of literary principles and acting like a character's sheer presence is enough to ruin a story, as if that character is so all consuming and powerful that the poor writers are hapless in it's aura and helpless to improve the story because of some mystical force the character exudes.

Shockingly, most people aren't buying this argument.

#243 Anaesthesia

Nazi penguin suits.

Fellow FUSer
405 posts

Gender:Female
Location:The Coney Island Disco Palace

Posted 09 October 2008 - 05:39 PM

Yeah, it's almost like having Sally be a "balancer" totally redeems Sonic of his flaws and precludes any kind of personal conflicts ever. All meaningful relationships are about balance, and that element doesn't make every other relationship unnecessary. You don't need to drop a bridge on Sally if you want to explore the relationships between the other characters, and I haven't seen a single rational argument in these great walls of text that have convinced me otherwise. The majority of it reeks of amateur psychology and an epic fanwank that could rival that of the Harmonians in the Harry Potter fandom if it escalated into an actual flamewar.

And that's all I've got to say about this argument, I promise.

You'd think that people
Would have had enough
Of silly love songs
I look around me and I see it isn't so
Some people wanna fill the world
With silly love songs
And what's wrong with that?
I'd like to know
'cause here I go again
I love you, I love you

I figured I had paid my debt to society
By paying my overdue fines
At the Multnoma County Library

#244 Guest_bossmanham_*

GUESTS

Posted 09 October 2008 - 05:42 PM

QUOTE

The majority of it reeks of amateur psychology and an epic fanwank that could rival that of the Harmonians in the Harry Potter fandom it fueled an actual flamewar.

Haha very nicely put.

#245 Guest_BigBrother_*

GUESTS

Posted 09 October 2008 - 05:57 PM

Let's face it folks; the Sonic comic series is not meant to be great piece of literature. There's always going to be issues over how Archie could be better writers and all that, but they have no reason to uphold themselves to such a ludicriously-high set of standards (for a comic meant for a mainly juvenile and preteen audience) that Miko aspires to, if only to find an arbitrary way to destroy SonSal. Since there's no incentive for Archie to use ludicriously-high standards, its laughably silly for anyone to judge a comic relationship to be inferior just because it has a bad "premise" compared to the great classics of romantic literature.

#246 Guest_Miko_*

GUESTS

Posted 09 October 2008 - 07:18 PM

I have acknowledged that the writers may not be competent enough to fix the team even if they disregard SonSal.
That's all I need to hear. Without good writers, nothing will ever get fixed at all. So why don't you waste your time writing letters to Archie begging them to get better writers for the comic instead of whining and complaining on these forums about SonSal?

I do complain about the writers. I complain about the writers far more than I complain about SonSal. However, ignoring part of the problem isn't going to solve it. Both problems need to be removed. Just because the writers are a problem doesn't suddenly mean that SonSal is not a problem too. You have yet to refute this.

However what you guys have been implying is that this can remove the need to get rid of SonSal, while it's been apart of my arguement already that getting rid of SonSal AND good writing need to occur and that it is the only way.
Only you and Shorty claim that getting rid of SonSal is an universially-accepted equivalent of good writing,

1. I said getting rid of SonSal AND good writing. Making the characterizations of the characters more defined, establishing them as foils of a specific attribute, stronger team dynamic, blah blah and so on are things I'd assume majority of people would want. Even you seemed to like it.

2.You still haven't come up with a a definition for good writing in terms of how you'd execute it.

None of you have been able to provide a scenario where SonSal can stay while the characters don't suffer the detriments discussed for the last 5 to 6 pages.
It's not our job to do anything; it's up to YOU to do all the hard work and show us why none of the team dynamics can improve while SonSal still exists

There is no incentive for the writers to even define Sonic's flaws specifically since Sally targets the impulse of these flaws (the manifestation of them). If it pops up, Sally will get it. You argued the other characters can help Sonic since his flaws would manifest in other ways, but when I asked you if you could even come up with some other forms of manifestation in general you couldn't.

However, your disgraceful game of hot potato only reveals that you're nothing more than an intellectually-lazy fan who doesn't have the guts to admit that your dislike of SonSal is derived from merely personal tastes of yours.

Right because things like "personal tastes" have no basis.

It IS a way.
Yet you admit that there are other ways as well, so why should Archie kowtow to your personal whims?

I don't admit there are other ways at this point in time. Maybe as new information comes that's a possibility. But as with science you form a conclusion based on what information you have. Not by what information you lack that has the potential to be there. You're arguing there are other ways for manifestation but you've not proven that things like alternative manifestation exist.

You haven't been able to provide the notion that any other methods even exist and it's not my job to even dispute that which does not exist.
Playing hot potato again I see. Why are you so afraid of admiting that you're wrong?

You don't have any other alternatives outlined. Therefore I assume my way is the only one that works. There's nothing wrong with this. I'm not being lazy or a coward. If you are going to present a refutation for goodness sake BB offer adequate support for it. "Good writing will save SonSal"? Give me a break. Again you haven't even defined a method that would expand on what that is in order for me to give my opinion as to why it would/wouldn't work.

I've already explained the essentials of a good writer under my proposal ..... giving Sonic more flaws that are more distinct and allowing the other characters to be foils to distinct attributes. This is so that they don't cheapen the place they have in Sonic's life among one another. It is also because the team dynamic won't suffer since characters won't have to rely on certain other characters being absent in order to be involved, and their personalities are will be more defined/distinct from one another.
Wow Miko, you've just come up with a solution that doesn't require getting rid of SonSal. You're actually useful for a change, I'm very impressed.....

Sally attacks Sonic's impulsiveness which is the manifestation of distinct flaws. If Sally attacks Sonic's impulsiveness then it is therefore a catch-all and so defining his flaws lacks signifficance. The other characters have no place to contribute to his flaws because Sally has dibs on any that manifest. Attacking manifestation and not specific flaws is something I personally find very immature in writing but that's hardly an issue. What I suppose I should remind you of is how you responded. You argued that flaws can manifest differently, BB. This is where I asked you to at least be able to come up with alternatives for flaw manifestation. You've yet to supply a single alternative.

If you repeat the same points after I've refuted them, I will simply remind you they've been refuted.
I find it funny that you and Shorty are about the only people who think our points are refuted by your unimpressive attempts at making logical arguments.

You keep repeating yourselves because the collctive can't come up with anything and as a defense mechanism you blame the opposing party as simply not being good enough. Please. "Why can't good writing solve the problem"? None of you seem to be able to define "good writing" for me to answer that because even you don't know how to do it in a way that doesn't sacrifice SonSal. The only one who might've tried was Ali but her "the character doesn't need any relevance to Sonic's life" idea has been refuted. As for you, you haven't demonstrated you know even one supposed (alternative) way to manifest a flaw, much less ways to divide amongst an entire team. And even if you did impulsiveness would be the method that's BEEN used by Sonic's character.

Lookng at the other variable as stand alone replacements to removing SonSal isn't good enough and will not replace the need for SonSal to be done away with.
I'd like to hear from an actual expert on writing first, to be honest. It's clear that your subjective opinions are severely clouding your judgement on how you think Archie should improve.

It's not a subjective opinion. Sally does attack the manifestation of Sonic's flaws (impulse). You yourself admitted it and argued that in spite of this other methods of manifestation were out there. Put up or shut up, BB. Where are all these other forms of manifestation you've been talking about?

Let's face it folks; the Sonic comic series is not meant to be great piece of literature.

Thanks for essentially admitting my idea would improve the quality of the comic. This is not about making Sonic a Shakespearean literature. It's about making it decent. If you're standards are too low, fine.

All meaningful relationships are about balance, and that element doesn't make every other relationship unnecessary.

You haven't heard a single valid arguement? How about hearing our arguement correctly. We've not been arguing aiming for balance is a bad thing. People seem to be under this misconception that SonSal is how all relationships work and that to attack SonSal means to attack all meaningful relationships. The relationship's not evil, it just doesn't fit in Archie comics.

They are dead set in their Sally hate, even though she's not a crappy Japanese anime chliche. There's nothing you can say to them. I stick with the argument that they are Sonic n00bz.

Just because Sally's not a "crappy Japanese anime cliche" does not mean she is good for the comic. The idea that "if it ain't from Japan, it's good" lacks support from your end.

#247 Guest_SAA_*

GUESTS

Posted 09 October 2008 - 07:40 PM

This has gone out of hand. This reminds me of my Senior year in High School. Every Friday we would have debates on current events. We called it "Free for all Friday." Anyway, me and a good would always debate over the Death Penalty. He was for, I was not. We always used to go on for hours. It got the point where we would even debate passed the bell to end class.

Then one day I thought we'd end it for a while. We all said our sides and then let it go, or so I thought. Just as I walked into the next class I had with him, someone was making a mess of the gum they chewed. "Well, they played with sticky gum so they should live with the mess" I said.
"HA! I'M RIGHT! People who kill SHOULD DIE" and then we fought until the end of the day.
Same thing here. Those who like SonSal will not give in, and those hate it won't give in. Are you really going to argue this till your death Miko? ARE YOU? I think we get it now that SonSal is not good in your book. WE KNOW. But what we DON'T KNOW is why you won't back it up. WHY

#248 Guest_kayona-kim_*

GUESTS

Posted 09 October 2008 - 07:45 PM

I don't really care about SonSal or whoever he dates, but I don't think that them being love-interests is ruining the comic or making it un-enjoyable. o.o
I've been skimming so I didn't catch everything, but HOW exactly is it not the writers fault if the characters are being presented poorly/ruining the dynamics/whatever? It's not making any sense from what I've read so far.

#249 Guest_Miko_*

GUESTS

Posted 09 October 2008 - 07:49 PM

QUOTE ("SAA":ured55wv)

Same thing here. Those who like SonSal will not give in, and those hate it won't give in. Are you really going to argue this till your death Miko? ARE YOU? I think we get it now that SonSal is not good in your book. WE KNOW. But what we DON'T KNOW is why you won't back it up. WHY

I have been backing it up. I even responded to you directly. If you have any further questions please ask. I also love how you're quick to ignore anyone who has a similar opinion of you if they just so happen to not offer support for their arguement.

P.S don't complain about me not letting it die when you're still hellbent on saying I don't back it up. If you're going to challenge me, expect a challenge.

QUOTE

but HOW exactly is it not the writers fault if the characters are being presented poorly/ruining the dynamics/whatever?

#250 Guest_kayona-kim_*

GUESTS

Posted 09 October 2008 - 07:54 PM

1. If Sally is supposed to attack Sonic's impulsiveness (the manifestation of his flaws) then the others have no room to contribute because she's assigned a catch all to all things wrong with his personality. This is a problem in the mechanics of the dynamic. Improving surrounding aspects of the book doesn't change this.

2. Again we're not arguing writers would need to for instance specify flaws in Sonic's character, establish a foil system for each specific flaw, etc... but holding writers accountable for this is only part of what'd need to be done.

Then can't the writers write the other characters contributing, and have Sally contribute in a different manner (whether or not it has anything to do with Sonic himself)? From what I've read in the comic lately, she hasn't been around that much anyways. I've been seeing more of Amy ect.

#251 Guest_Miko_*

GUESTS

Posted 09 October 2008 - 08:04 PM

QUOTE

Then writers can write the other characters to contribute then?

Not without destroying the SonSal system of making Sally a catch all for all of Sonic's flaws.

QUOTE

From what I've read lately, she hasn't been in the comic that much anyways. I've been seeing more of Amy ect.

We've been arguing that by removing SonSal the oppourtunity (and I strongly emphasize the word oppourtunity) exists for the characters to contribute to Sonic using their personality. If the writers remove SonSal and choose not to for instance define Sonic's flaws and make the other characters foils for a specific flaw THEN we can blame it on poor writing (unrelated to SonSal). Frankly, I haven't seen the comics establish a very distinct set of flaws for Sonic's character in spite of Sally's absence. This would be an example of poor writing on Ian's part. Yes, Amy's there a bit more but the relationships are cold/shallow because Ian will not take the extra steps necessary. Then again, if he intends to continue leaving the SonSal dynamic it makes sense as to why he isn't. It's not a wise move but I can see why he's not doing it.

#252 Guest_kayona-kim_*

GUESTS

Posted 09 October 2008 - 08:07 PM

Sorry i'm on the phone while i read this so im scatterbrained

Are Sonic and Sally even together right now? Seems like they're only flirting.

#253 Guest_Miko_*

GUESTS

Posted 09 October 2008 - 08:10 PM

QUOTE

Are Sonic and Sally even together right now? Seems like they're only flirting.

Whether they're officially together as a couple or not, it doesn't matter. The balancing element is a part of their dynamic regardless.

#254 Guest_kayona-kim_*

GUESTS

Posted 09 October 2008 - 08:19 PM

I wasnt worried about their dynamic with my question, i was just wondering if they were together.

#255 Guest_Shorty_*

GUESTS

Posted 09 October 2008 - 08:20 PM

QUOTE ("kayona-kim":3hvs3dy8)

I wasnt worried about their dynamic with my question, i was just wondering if they were together.

Nah, they're not together.... or at least not yet.

#256 Guest_BigBrother_*

GUESTS

Posted 09 October 2008 - 09:29 PM

QUOTE ("Miko":1eee2dw3)

Just because the writers are a problem doesn't suddenly mean that SonSal is not a problem too.

That's only your opinion. Despite your presumptuous attempts to disguise your opinion as fact, you've utterly failed to give us a reason why your precious opinion has more weight than anyone else's, so too bad for you.

QUOTE

You still haven't come up with a a definition for good writing in terms of how you'd execute it.

I'll be going off-topic if I do that, so I won't bother. I'd suggest you learn how to remain on-topic too, Miko. It makes debates end faster for one thing.....

QUOTE

There is no incentive for the writers to even define Sonic's flaws specifically since Sally targets the impulse of these flaws (the manifestation of them).

Yet another cringe-worthy attempt at amateur psychology. Not to mention being extremely presumptuous since you think you know what makes the writers tick.
Try doing some research and interview some writers first before you march in here proclaiming that you alone know what incentives the writers have and don't have.

QUOTE

Right because things like "personal tastes" have no basis.

Your personal tastes have no objective basis, which means it's superior in no way to any other person's opinion. Passing off your subjective tastes as absolute fact is woefully unprofessional.

QUOTE

I don't admit there are other ways at this point in time.

Funny then how you came up with a solution earlier that can work without removing SonSal, flip-flopper.

QUOTE

Therefore I assume my way is the only one that works.

You only assume that it works; you don't even know if it will. Since you're not an expert, we can all disregard your "advice" as we please.

QUOTE

The other characters have no place to contribute to his flaws because Sally has dibs on any that manifest.

Has this been officially confirmed by the writers? No it hasn't, so tough love. The concern-trolling rantings of an amateur psychologist is hardly conclusive evidence by the standards of this forum.

QUOTE

Thanks for essentially admitting my idea would improve the quality of the comic.

Too bad Archie doesn't seem to think your way. Archie's quality will remain the same as it always has been; live with it. Archie will never become a decent piece of literature since Archie doesn't intend its comic to be one.

QUOTE

None of you seem to be able to define "good writing" for me to answer that because even you don't know how to do it in a way that doesn't sacrifice SonSal.

The reason we don't bother defining what "good writing" means is that whenever we say that Sonic should develop meaningful relationships with the other FFs in a way that makes Sonic need them, you get all uppity and proclaim that the SonSal premise is FUBAR and unusual just because it got slightly modified. Well I got a message for you Miko; you are not the judge of determining whenever changing someone's characterization or modifying a dynamic will rape what everyone loved about those aspects of the comic. As much as your shrill alarmism tries to deny it, people won't suddenly hate a character or dynamic just because it's been slightly modified.

We all say that Sonic should rely more, both physically and emotionally, on the other FFs. Most of us are willing to give Sally less of a focus so that other characters can be developed more. You, on the other hand, scream in terror that SonSal fans will reject en masse their ship just because the the premise no longer reflects 100% why they became SonSal fans. However just like the time you lamely argued that fans would reject an Antoine who wasn't as much of a sterotype as he was in SatAM (oh noes, it would remove the point of his character! RUN!!!!!!), you're filled with elitist BS.

QUOTE

Put up or shut up, BB. Where are all these other forms of manifestation you've been talking about?

How cute; you think you tell me what to do despite refusing to answer my questions time and time again. However I will throw a bone since I feel a tiny bit of pity for you: you might as well rewrite Sonic's character due to the lack of flaws that SatAM-Archie have given him. But nooooooooooooo; we can't do that because it would change both his character and SonSal since the premises behind them wouldn't be totally 100% like the ones that attracted fans in the first place. But you'll never give the fandom the credit they deserve; if they can handle change, so should you. I don't want to hear your crap excuses over why any possible changes to the SonSal dynamic should be treated with a double standard compared to changes regarding all the other character dynamics.

*******

So we've reached the logical end of yet another accursed debate, Miko. We may both agree that the team dynamics could be improved in theory, but you think that this can only be done by getting rid of SonSal. Changing the dynamics of SonSal is absouletly unacceptable for you since it changes the original dynamic established long ago by the gods of SatAM. However in your never-ending hypocrisy, you'll allow the dynamics between other characters to change based on whatever double standard you pull from your rear end. Since your reasons behind getting rid of SonSal are not based in objective truth, the only conclusion we can gather is that...... you just don't like SonSal. Once again, you've decided to act as an alarmist shrill who's personal bias is shrouded in pseudo-logic which falls apart whenever someone calls you on your BS. I hope this is the last time I'll have to say something on this subject.

#257 Guest_Miko_*

GUESTS

Posted 09 October 2008 - 11:18 PM

Just because the writers are a problem doesn't suddenly mean that SonSal is not a problem too.
That's only your opinion. Despite your presumptuous attempts to disguise your opinion as fact, you've utterly failed to give us a reason why your precious opinion has more weight than anyone else's, so too bad for you.

Science doesn't parade itself as fact, but it's pretty handy to use all the same. Your precious "opinion" hasn't been supported. You say with good writing is an alternative. however you've yet to detail what constitutes as this good writing you've been going on and on about. Again if you can't tell me what constitutes as good writing, I can't debate it. At the same time if you can't expand on what this "good writing" is, I assume it is a on issue until proven.

You still haven't come up with a a definition for good writing in terms of how you'd execute it.
I'll be going off-topic if I do that, so I won't bother.

...Wot?

No this is very on-topic. You need to explain what constitutes as "good writing." otherwise people cannot evaluate your so-called alternative.

There is no incentive for the writers to even define Sonic's flaws specifically since Sally targets the impulse of these flaws (the manifestation of them).
Yet another cringe-worthy attempt at amateur psychology.

Even if this were my attempt to be Freud, saying it's "cringe worthy" without explaining any faults in the deduction is a failure at refuting the point.

Not to mention being extremely presumptuous since you think you know what makes the writers tick.

Ad hom and strawman. I said there was no extrinsic incentive/purpose to expand on Sonic's flaws if Sally's there. Even if they wanted to, if they value preserving SonSal more they'll have to leave that idea at the door because Sally's purpose is to catch all flaws as they manifest (oh and how are those other forms of manifestation coming, BB?). Furthermore it's not as if you don't assume you know how a good writer ticks, what they should be capable of doing (even though you've yet to outline what this good writer should do).

Right because things like "personal tastes" have no basis.
Your personal tastes have no objective basis, which means it's superior in no way to any other person's opinion.

Sally keeping in check Sonic's "recklessness/impulsivenes/etc" is something you can find in SatAM and Archie. These is an observation that you can find within both the comic and cartoon. It is not a wishy washy subjective concept to which my arguement's been rooted. I've explained how the removal of SonSal plus adequate writing skills (and I DETAILED what that meant, unlike you btw), is a solution. You haven't supported your opinion by making clear what this "good writing" that can pose as a direct alternative constitutes. It has no substance to even discuss. So even if you were to call what I've been saying as "mere opinion" it's been supported far more than yours. Your whole "alternative manifestation" and "good writing composition" haven't been outlined. You haven't really presented an arguement yourself and are so desparate you're latching onto my idea in hopes it will get you out of the hole you dug yourself into.

Passing off your subjective tastes as absolute fact is woefully unprofessional.

While I'm open to being proven that another option is available, if none is provided I am will act as though another option doesn't exist.

I don't admit there are other ways at this point in time.
Funny then how you came up with a solution earlier that can work without removing SonSal, flip-flopper.

That solution requires removing Sally out of the picture because she is assigned to be a catch-all attack on Sonic's flaws upon them manifesting. When you remove someone who can catch every flaw upon manifestation you can specify the flaws and construct the other characters to catch specific flaws and not the manifestation. Your arguement was that we can offer multiple avenues of manifestation so Sally can stay as is. So far you've not even been able to provide a single alternative.

Therefore I assume my way is the only one that works.
You only assume that it works; you don't even know if it will.

SonSal itself is a good indicator that it would actually. To requote a response to a similar accusation:

The best way to prove this that comes to mind is by using SonSal as an example itself. SonSal fans value it's sense of balance because by doing so the personality traits are emphasized, and Sonic and Sally contribute to one another's lives through who THEY are and not simply through the functions they serve in combat or a generic good natured persona with no defining characteristics.

When you look at SonSal and how Sonic and Sally work to compliment another and how close this formula has made them, it strongly suggests that if this were applied in a way that could include other characters, they'd be closer to Sonic too. Fans who don't like SonSal can admit that in Archie and in SatAM Sonic and Sally have had a close bond to one another. And that's what this is all about. Instilling a team dynamic and a bond between Sonic and as many leading cast members as possible.

The other characters have no place to contribute to his flaws because Sally has dibs on any that manifest.
Has this been officially confirmed by the writers? No it hasn't, so tough love.

They don't have to officially confirm it. Sally nips in the bud his impulsiveness, his impulsiveness being the manifestation of his flaws. do the writers need to confirm that to make a public statement saying this is how their relationship's characterized? No. You follow what SonSal was upon it's establishment. Just as you would characterization. If a writer makes a character OOC you have the right to call them out on it. This is because the established logics of the world supercede what the writer simply feels like saying. If this were not so, writers like Ken especially wouldn't have tried patching up various plotholes. A writer can often ignore the logics of the story, and therefore their voice alone on the matter does not substitute viewing the story yourself. How many times have the professionals made plotholes, most especially Ian? Fiona/Scourge, the whole Mina-Mighty-Mogul thing, Sally going back to battle in the first place?

Thanks for essentially admitting my idea would improve the quality of the comic.
Too bad Archie doesn't seem to think your way. Archie's quality will remain the same as it always has been; live with it.

Whether I choose to live with it or not doesn't mean it's good writing. I'm merely pointing that out.

None of you seem to be able to define "good writing" for me to answer that because even you don't know how to do it in a way that doesn't sacrifice SonSal.
The reason we don't bother defining what "good writing" means is that whenever we say that Sonic should develop meaningful relationships with the other FFs in a way that makes Sonic need them, you get all uppity and proclaim that the SonSal premise is FUBAR and unusual just because it got slightly modified.

Slight modifications my foot. You have to pretty much rip apart the whole concept of balancing the manifestation of flaws, before you get into the nitty gritty of establishing flaws, and characters as foils. That is not a "slight modification". You say that he should develop meaningful relationships, but you can't actually think of a way to do it while preserving what SonSal actually IS. You have to pretty much strip SonSal of it's identity from the other pairings we already have that are already less intrusive in this regard. Frankly SonSal would be mischaracterized to copycat the much more functional Sonic pairups in the book. I really don't see the point of that.

And even if they did that move, the logics of this book call for consistency in things such as characterization and dynamics (which is actually why this is a big issue. The main cast doesn't really have a defined character, and while the book implies we should see them as close that's not being reflected in the story). SonSal's dynamic has already been characterized. For those of us who will not bend the logics of the book AGAIN for SonSal to exist, we will continue to understand the other potential pairups as those that's relationships truly characterize what is functional for the logic of the story while SonSal's dynamic is being taken out of it's character to work.

As much as your shrill alarmism tries to deny it, people won't suddenly hate a character or dynamic just because it's been slightly modified.

It's not simply about you. What point is there to copy that which is readily available. If they want to see something another pairing offers because it's less intrusive why not change shipping preferences? If you change what made the dynamic between Sonic and Sally unique what is the point? I don't recall getting an answer to this.

Most of us are willing to give Sally less of a focus so that other characters can be developed more.

No, most of you are willing to tear what made Sonic/Sally's dynamic unique so it'd copycat some other kind of dynamic that naturally characterizes what's necessary for the book. Apparently as long as something that resembles a blue hedgehog and squirrel wear a tux and white dress at the end of the day, it doesn't matter who they are as a couple. If everyone's going to be that shallow about it'd i'd just lap up Spaz's wedding picture and call it quits with the whining over SonSal. I'm not going to say that you have to agree with me, here. But I'm saying other pairings naturally can do what SonSal would have to be mischaracterized in order to do. I see them as better pairing choices. This has never been about making you agree. I simply wanted to test my opinion.

However just like the time you lamely argued that fans would reject an Antoine who wasn't as much of a sterotype as he was in SatAM (oh noes, it would remove the point of his character! RUN!!!!!!), you're filled with elitist BS.

I never said a thing about the people already fans of SatAM rejecting Antione. I'm saying that you run the risk in a politically correct society to raise flags towards people who'd find offensive a blatant negative French stereotype on a CHILD'S cartoon. Not the simpson's, not South Park which are geared towards adults...but impressionable kids. Heck even other communities have mentioned Ant's French stereotypes. Albiet they're not pro SatAM. In any case stop refferencing from discussion you felt more comfortable with to unsuccessfully band aid your lack of ground in this discussion. It's ad homming.

Put up or shut up, BB. Where are all these other forms of manifestation you've been talking about?
How cute; you think you tell me what to do despite refusing to answer my questions time and time again.

Answer what questions? You can't find a method to improving the bonds while keeping SonSal properly characterized. If you can't explain the method, there's no way to decipher whether or not it works. So when you say "Why can't good writing solve the problem", you need to expand on what good writing means.

However I will throw a bone since I feel a tiny bit of pity for you: you might as well rewrite Sonic's character due to the lack of flaws that SatAM-Archie have given him.

It's not necessary to rewrite Sonic though. Simply define his flaws. That's something that wasn't defined so it's not a matter of rewriting as in, removing something that was preexisting to make way for a new idea.

But you'll never give the fandom the credit they deserve; if they can handle change, so should you.

It's hilarious you even say that. When a SonSal fan is upset because they feel Sally slapping Sonic and leaving the battlefeild goes against the logics of the story, that's ok. They shouldn't handle that change oh no. But suddenly when the logic of the story must bend further and mischaracterize further the relationship between two characters when other girls naturally can make it work, we don't have the right to reject that "change."

Changing the dynamics of SonSal is absouletly unacceptable for you since it changes the original dynamic established long ago by the gods of SatAM. However in your never-ending hypocrisy, you'll allow the dynamics between other characters to change based on whatever double standard you pull from your rear end.

The issue is that their dynamics aren't established. Which is why I'm not angry that the comic gave SonSal a dynamic at around issue 18 when they originally didn't really define one for them previously. Their good points and bad points can be expanded upon (and if they cannot be THEN I say they need to be ditched) as in adding to what is there, without subtracting.

#258 randomizer

Fellow FUSer

Fellow FUSer
1,394 posts

Gender:Male
Location:Downunda

Posted 09 October 2008 - 11:52 PM

Must you continue these quoting wars?

#259 Lord Exor

Evil Incarnate

Fellow FUSer
465 posts

Gender:Male
Location:A tank.

Posted 10 October 2008 - 08:10 AM

But my dear Randomizer, the thread wouldn't be any fun without quote wars.

#260 Guest_SAA_*

GUESTS

Posted 10 October 2008 - 09:31 AM

QUOTE ("Miko":1c5rnz7w)

QUOTE ("SAA":1c5rnz7w)

You have not backed it up like I asked. YOU won't post the pictures to give me solid proof. Yes, you do argue well. I don't doubt that at all. But the only proof you give is your words. And that is not proof at all. I won't believe you until you give what I find is proof. Whatever I wanted before, does not matter now. Because now I want picture solid proof. I harp on this because I have not seen it. I have not seen any more then your words, and words alone will not convince me. If you do not want to proof this, then please say so. I will gladly try ( I say try because I know I have trouble staying away from this argument.) to back off. Thats all I ask now. And thats all I will ever ask. If you think I want different, quote me wrong.