That's funny, I felt the same way about his entire run of Young Justice...

Arsenal | May 10, 07:06 CET

I turned off 'Haunted' at the beginning of the first act when I finally realized what was going on and decided I couldn't get over the poor execution of an otherwise cool episode idea and haven't turned Dollhouse back on since. I pretty much agree completely with Mr. David's critique. From the outset, 'Dollhouse' didn't know what it was and it's shown on screen. This show was the result of Joss trying to find a vehicle for Eliza, and not him sitting around thinking "Wow, this would be a cool TV show." So what we get is a vehicle for Eliza, and not a cool TV show. Joss is capable of great things (he can pull off a superhero musical), but only when he doesn't force it and is focused on a story he wants to tell, not an actor he wants to use in a story.

Barclay | May 10, 07:12 CET

I don't understand the "it was a just an Eliza-vehicle, Joss wasn't focused on telling a great story" argument. Joss came up with an idea he loved while talking to Eliza about the kind of show she should get. He wasn't planning on getting back into television, but when he came up with Dollhouse he wanted to. His first priority was to make a great show, and I don't understand how anyone could think otherwise.

Racoon Boy | May 10, 07:38 CET

I disagree, Barclay. Joss' unmade spec script "Afterlife," which was a big sale for him early in his career (circa 1994), contains many of the same ideas as Dollhouse... in some episodes, entire plot points seem lifted straight from it. To wit:

A secret organization buried deep underground that mind wipes young people and replaces their personalities? Check.
A dead person in a young person's body enjoying the feeling of being young and reconnecting with people who think they're dead ("Haunted")? Check.
A mind wipe going wrong when the body's original personality, that of a serial killer, returns ("Omega")? Check.
A dead person getting revenge on the person who caused their death from beyond the grave ("Ghost")? Check.

Clearly, these ideas have been in his head for a while. Regardless of your opinion of the show, I think you're reading too much into the backstory of its creation. Personally, even if Joss came up with something at lunch that Eliza thought was the greatest thing ever, I don't think he would commit to creating an entire series if he didn't think he could do the idea justice.

[ edited by bonzob on 2009-05-10 07:41 ]

bonzob | May 10, 07:40 CET

For all the flaws that get pointed out by bloggers, critics, etc, I find that the big thing missing from Dollhouse, for me, is a family.

Family, blood or otherwise, is pretty much an undercurrent in all of my favourite shows, especially Joss's other shows. In fact, I think much of why I don't care for the first season or so of Angel is that there really wasn't an established family yet. But when I think of all my other favourite shows - Friday Night Lights, Terminator, Six Feet Under, Sports Night, The West Wing, Veronica Mars, Battlestar Galactica, Chuck - they all have a strong family element. The only exception I can really think of would be House. And House is my least favourite of all these shows.

Knuckleball | May 10, 08:32 CET

Adelle the mother, Boyd the father and Topher the son?

Simon | May 10, 08:37 CET

We saw Ballard being adopted into a nice, dysfunctional family--all ready for the next season. (Yes, I know, "if"....)

Personally, I got into the show intellectually from the beginning. It won my heart with episode #6.

And, upon reviewing Mr David's bibliography, I am not impressed.

not_Bridget | May 10, 09:22 CET

I reallllly disagree with Mr. David. I guess I understand where he's coming from, but he honestly must have been telling the truth when he said he slept during a few episodes... because how could he believe what he does about Echo/Caroline?

He said, "An identity about which we know nothing and care less."

We've gotten lengthy flashbacks. We've gotten glimpses of her showing through Echo from the get go. Caroline is essentially the core of the show, because the two major plots are about finding her; Echo finding her the way Alpha unfortunately found his true self and Ballard finding her to rescue her. Blank slates or not--and I think it would be incredibly hard to argue that they really are blank slates after the finale--I've come to care about the actives. I've come to care about all the Dollhouse employees and Ballard as well. The consistency of the show is at least as good as that of Firefly, with potential to get even better. As far as character stuff, strength of themes, and overall excellence, I'd put it at Firefly's level or just below it.

I love Dollhouse, and have found it to be as Whedony as all of Whedon's previous works. I, for one, will be devastated if it's cancelled.

patxshand | May 10, 09:32 CET

I think Cowboy Pete's viewing has fatal flaws

Let Down | May 10, 09:35 CET

So I just looked up who he is. Um, if someone had just lent me one of their characters to use in my comic book I wouldn't be writing a blog post on how much I dislike his show. That seems very rude to me

Plus, quite apart from him just not liking the show (I can't prove him wrong) much of what he says is objectively wrong but it's all ground we've been over ad nauseum

Let Down | May 10, 09:41 CET

After the DVD comes out, I would be interested to see if people's opinions have changed. Sometimes I think we are still too close to the event to be completely objective.

Simon | May 10, 09:45 CET

Can we not answer "Yes" to Echo's "did I fall asleep?" ever again in a Dollhouse review? It's the hack Dollhouse put down by this point.

noplaceIcanbe | May 10, 10:20 CET

I am a fan of Davids writing, but this blog is strange, since his entire run on "The Incredible Hulk", which is still his crowning achievement, was full of slow burner storylines where the editor had to keep reassuring readers that "..don't worry it's building, it's gonna be good. Has he ever let you down before or regurgitated a story.No." exactly what he's now holding against Dollhouse.

eyeboogers | May 10, 11:51 CET

I do enjoy Mr. David's work. Fallen Angel is one of the books I get every month, he writes the best Star Trek novels and, while I prefer Brian Lynch's Angel comics, his are very good.

I pretty much agree with his assessment. I watch Dollhouse, I find much I enjoy and much I don't, and if it isn't renewed I'll feel bad for Joss, bad for the fans who love it, but I won't feel bad for me.

I don't mean enjoy in the 'sit back and turn off your mind' way. I like to be stimulated, challenged and shook up.

redeem147 | May 10, 14:11 CET

I think I could have written much of that.

Dana5140 | May 10, 14:13 CET

Agreed, Dana5140. He pretty much nailed my feelings on the show, which is the first time Joss truly disappointed me. Fans of the show keep saying things like "the people who don't like the show or gave up should have waited longer or paid more attention," but I don't think it's fair or reasonable to expect people to suffer through a number of hours of bad television, based on the vague promise that it will get better, or to scold people for not paying closer attention when they're incredibly bored. For me, Dollhouse is a failure: creatively, financially, on every level.

Rob | May 10, 14:23 CET

I loved the plot elements, characters, etc. in the second season of the Sarah Connor Chronicles, but the show only became worth watching in the last few episodes. Was it worth sitting through the eighteen or so mostly mediocre episodes you had to watch first? No.

My point is I've seen what it can be like when a tv show falls into this pattern over a full season, and have no desire to watch a series if I feel it's prone to do likewise.

[ edited by brinderwalt on 2009-05-10 14:41 ]

brinderwalt | May 10, 14:40 CET

But it's not bad television. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's bad. I never liked T:SCC, but I never thought it was bad. It just didn't interest me. Same with Chuck.

And the prospect of a Season 2 now that they have some steam going, and where the characters are, and where the story's at (which I gather Joss had originally wanted to get to sooner)? Ooh.

pat32082 | May 10, 14:42 CET

Quite frankly, it is bad television because it fails on the surface of its narrative to come off as something that even wants to be perceived as entertaining. I enjoyed it, immensely, but to do so I've been having to de-analyze what it is I've been watching to such an extent that I feel totally in sympathy with all those people who just want to watch simple, entertaining television. I love the Sarah Connor Chronicles too, but it was the same way. I would not feel comfortable recommending either of these shows to potential new viewers without extensiv e reservations on my part.

brinderwalt | May 10, 14:54 CET

As interesting as people's views are on TSCC, this is actually a Dollhouse thread. If you want to chat about Summer's show, we have Whedonesque.org for that sort of thing.

Simon | May 10, 15:00 CET

It is bad television *to you*. It's entirely subjective. One of my favourite lines from a movie is from Dusk Till Dawn. "That's a matter of opinion, and I don't give a fuck about yours". When it comes to movie and TV, that's how I look at it.

I too have issues with Dollhouse, but I'm absolutely sure there's people out there who will find it's the greatest TV show ever, and I'm fine with that.

gossi | May 10, 15:01 CET

That's ridiculous, brinderwalt. You might not like it but on what can you possibly be basing your assertion that the show isn't trying to be entertaining? It has plot twists, beautiful actors and actresses, fight scenes, a villain and so on. I love the show for its intelligence but it's hardly some Brechtian experiment in wilfuly alienating the audience. I've got some friends absolutely hooked on this show and some of those friends (much as I love them) aren't hugely bright and watch a lot of trashy TV

Let Down | May 10, 15:03 CET

Well, if I understand, then it's bad because it's not entertaining on a mass-appeal level? Uh, neither is Mad Men. Or the Wire. Or Battlestar Galactica. Or the Shield. (Also note: All cable shows. All relatively uncompromised creatively by outside forces.)

Those are hard damn shows to watch, with very few out-and-out likable characters, nor are they entertaining in the same way as a mass-appeal show like "House" or "Lost." But they're damn good television, and entertaining to the people who enjoy it.

I'm not saying Dollhouse is there yet to match with these shows, but it's playing in the same murky, uncomfortable pool of plot and character. And it's Joss' "cable" show. On a network.

[ edited by pat32082 on 2009-05-10 15:19 ]

pat32082 | May 10, 15:10 CET

A problem with Dollhouse, as I see it, is that it's a poor match for broadcast television (not just FOX). One of the notes FOX gave back early on for Dollhouse was that they thought it looks like a cable show, and - uhm - they're right. Mad Men, The Wire, Battlestar Galactica and The Shield are all niche cable shows.

Broadcast is about mass appeal. I've described Dollhouse before as a show about hate rather than about found family, and I think that's both why it works creatively and why it doesn't sell on FOX.

I also think it was a bit uneven. I wasn't sure what kind of show I was tuning in to each week - a thriller, a ghost whisperer episode, a global conspiracy episode etc - and lack of consistency is an easy way to lose an audience.

[ edited by gossi on 2009-05-10 15:18 ]

gossi | May 10, 15:17 CET

Hah. Check out my edited post above, gossi.

ETA: Oh, and I agree. Uneven. Not perfect. But I was always entertained. I always found it everybody on it highly watchable, and it always created this uneasy mood which I loved. I looked forward to Fridays. I never turned it on out of some obligation to Joss.

[ edited by pat32082 on 2009-05-10 15:24 ]

[ edited by pat32082 on 2009-05-10 15:27 ]

pat32082 | May 10, 15:20 CET

To be perfectly honest, that is kind of how the show has come across to me, and I don't necessarily have a problem with that.. I actually enjoy that kind of thing. Some of the time. I just wouldn't expect there to be much of a tv watching audience who share my interest, and unfortunately, judging by ratings I think I'm probably right.

brinderwalt | May 10, 15:22 CET

I don't think anybody involved intentionally tried to alienate the audience. If they did they need firing.

gossi | May 10, 15:25 CET

It'd be so sweet if they let FX air Season 2. That'd be perfect. But there's probably some money/contract/inner-FOX network/20th/FX issue dealie.

[ edited by pat32082 on 2009-05-10 15:33 ]

pat32082 | May 10, 15:31 CET

I will be devastated if Dollhouse doesn't get another season. I think this is Joss's most mature and substantial work yet...

I also don't give a crap if it's not dumbed down enough for Ghost Whisperer fans to "get it", since Ghost Whisperer alienates people who enjoy intelligent television.

[ edited by mortimer on 2009-05-10 15:38 ]

mortimer | May 10, 15:37 CET

The author is totally missing the point. And I'm not some Whedon zombie who denies that 'Dollhouse' has shown it's flaws. I, too, spent time this season shaking my head over some of what I was seeing. I hated (and will continue with a fiery passion to hate) EVERYTHING about the opening credits.

But I must refute some points-
The problem is that it’s difficult to become emotionally invested in your lead when your lead is...a cipher.
Because it's the STORY behind the cipher that we want to see, and why others (Ballard, Alpha) feel her to be person worth fighting for. Indeed, 'cipher' being a term for a person of 'no influence', which totally does not apply to Echo/Caroline in any way.

Echo has no personality...how are we supposed to care about a character about whose background we know nothing?
Because we started to learn more about her background and her motivations for entering the Dollhouse.

Echo is simply a vehicle for Dushku to do something different every week and for her to be whoever the writers need her to be.
Yup. It's called plot and character development, and it's kinda a big part of being a TV character. Imagine 'House' without the patients there to bring out facets of the medical staff?!

...the protagonist should be the one whose goals and desires drive your story.
But why focus solely on Echo? I WANT to know why Ballard is so obsessed. What happened to Whiskey? What's Adelle's story? And, since you find Echo so boring, why NOT focus on the other characters?

A heroine who is a damsel in distress and doesn’t know it...
But she IS beginning to realize it and show more independence.

The most interesting... character in the Disney version is Maleficent. Y
Yup, like I said, 'What's up with Adelle?'

Echo (or Caroline as she was previously known) willingly got herself into this fix and now is waiting for someone else to get her out of it.
But she isn't waiting around to be saved, and was she 'willing' or was it an act of desperation? Anyway, I bet a shiny nickel that if the series continues, she ends up saving herself- it IS Joss, after all.

The show has moral ambiguities up the whazoo that it simply doesn’t seem prepared to handle...they’re prostitutes without the courage of their convictions.
The dolls don't HAVE convictions, as those've been erased. We're asking what happens when those ambiguities show up in their clients, handlers, and, at some future stage, in the dolls themselves.

Any viewer with a working moral compass is going to get the whimwhams from the concept going in.
But what if we as viewers were left to question if the Dollhouse actually IS always wrong and morally reprehensible? I was aghast initially, but now I've seen the Dollhouse used for good, I'm starting to question my own beliefs. Does AI or DWTS do that to you?

It’s easy to say that it’s misogynistic since you’ve basically got women being used as sacks of meat for male fantasies. On the other hand, you’ve got men in the same fix.
I agree with the squick factor of the blatant exploitation. I'd like the show to be around long enough to acheive it's aims in addressing that issue.

But by the end, we’re damned near back to status quo, with the only slight wrinkle being that Echo seems to be having stirrings of her previous identity. An identity about which we know nothing and care less..
That's you. I care a great deal. And the status is most certainly NOT quo, with the addition of the various twisty turny points.

Whether I watch it or not doesn’t matter.
If you write, tweet, buzz, blog, watch online, buy the DVD, tell your friends, or just watch it for your own darn enjoyment- it matters!

missb | May 10, 16:05 CET

missb: Because it's the STORY behind the cipher that we want to see

The problem is how many stories were of the "engagement-of-the-week" variety. That puts the emphasis on the protagonist, not the behind-the-scenes story. I've thought from day one that the show had to be about the DOLLHOUSE, much in the same way the Studio60 had to be about the making of a comedy show (not the comedy show itself).

I have to agree with Mr. David on this point: "even poorly executed Whedon is better than a lot of shows at their best." Dollhouse is better than most things on TV (so not bad TV), but it is frustrating compared to the other Mutant Enemy productions.

OneTeV | May 10, 16:36 CET

I hereby rescind my previous comments in this thread and support what gossi said instead. It's got the same gist of what I was getting at, but is more direct, on topic, and less snarky :) than what I said.


Update: Edited for typos.

[ edited by brinderwalt on 2009-05-10 18:14 ]

brinderwalt | May 10, 17:50 CET

It's possible to dislike the show and still "get it."

AuntArlene | May 10, 18:34 CET

Hey Aunt Arlene,

I'm not saying that it isn't.

I was responding to the idea that Dollhouse is supposedly too complicated, morally grey and smart for it's own good, by suggesting that Ghost whisperer turns off people for being the opposite.

I'm happy for people who "get the show" to criticize it. I understand that the show isn't to everyone's tastes, but I don't think that anyone who "gets it" could say that it isn't a well written and intelligent show (and I refuse to see that as an inherent problem with the show).

[ edited by mortimer on 2009-05-10 18:49 ]

[ edited by mortimer on 2009-05-10 18:50 ]

mortimer | May 10, 18:46 CET

OK. Sorry for misunderstanding. :)

AuntArlene | May 10, 20:08 CET

you don't have to be a genius to get dollhouse. i mean my little brother who's 10 totally gets it!! It's his favourite thing on TV other than 30 rock.

and yea I didnt like some of the episodes well, really just 2 and 3, but we stuck with it and it totally paid off.

I can relate with some characters, Adelle wanting to feel something, Topher trying to be the kid to make people proud of him, and if they really did volunteer the actives. It would be nice to get away from real life sometimes.

This is probably my 2nd favourite Joss work, right under Dr. Horrible :)

RheaM | May 10, 20:08 CET

I absolutely love Peter David's latest run on X-Factor but it took over 30 issues to finally get a jaw-dropping moment out of me.

Meanwhile, Dollhouse achieved major revelations consistently throughout the season. Each time a doll was "outed" as being undercover I was at least somewhat surprised.

The pacing on Dollhouse was much more in sync with itself whereas X-Factor--while an amazing character study of Jamie Madrox aka Multiple Man--has barely utilized some of its best ensemble characters.

Oh, Mr. David. I don't know what to think.

CrazyKidBen | May 10, 20:15 CET

This article is not criticising the idea that the fans had to be patient and wait for the show to get good. It is criticising the show for not getting good.

I disagree in that I think it got better than he does, though I agree with much of what he said. I was particularly pleased to see the comment "that’s fine if you’re doing a two-hour film" in that this is something I have been meaning to mention for a while. Interestingly enough, I would not say it for the same reason he does. It is something that I have thought when people have been contemptuous towards people who are criticising it for not having anyone you can like, much less a "good guy." The horribleness of the situationand everybody in it makes it something that many people are not going to want to revisit on a weekly basis. That was certainly one of the many problems I found with the first episodes. I still find it a problem in that I am not emotionally invested in any of the characters and have doubts that I will because Joss is going to such lengths to make sure we see the negatives in everybody before we (or at least I) can get invested in them. Why should we invest in these people if we know from the beginning how awful they are?

I also don't give a crap if it's not dumbed down enough for Ghost Whisperer fans to "get it", since Ghost Whisperer alienates people who enjoy intelligent television.

mortimer, it may be your intention to dispute someone's assertion that Dollhouse is too intelligent for its own good, but it comes off as an arrogant assertion that anyone who does not like Dollhouse is stupid or only likes stupid television. It is something we Whedon fans need to be careful about because we can easily come off as intellectual snobs who dismiss critics as not smart enough to understand how good Whedon shows are.

newcj | May 10, 20:39 CET

"...even poorly executed Whedon is better than a lot of shows at their best."

And this is why I keep watching. There are parts I like and parts I don't, but I trust the intelligence of Joss as a creator to fix what needs to be fixed and answer what needs to be answered.

Didn't think I would want the Dollhouse DVD, but I am sure there will be sooooo much discussion and explanaton for some of the "problems" of DH. I wanna know more.

lottalettuce | May 10, 22:38 CET

There are so many reasons I didn't like the execution of Dollhouse, many appearing in Peter David's post. I'd love to discuss them but, frankly, I know I'll get bashed, become frustrated, and say something rash before storming off to my figurative room to play with my theoretical toys all by my hypothetical lonesome.

In lieu of that, I would like to point out that, even in kind of hating this show, I found there was a fascinating human rights aspect to it that brought great and important debate to the issue of informed consent. When each of those soon-to-be actives signed the dotted line, could they have possibly known what they were getting themselves into? Whether deeply embroiled in the situation (like Boyd, Dewitt) or on the outside looking in (Ballard, the audience) can anyone definitively say what the true nature of the Dollhouse is? When we talk about slavery, when we talk about rape (mental or physical) in the context of this show we don't ever get to any hard truth. What matters, though, is that we're talking about these things. In raising the question of a soul, something that can never be ripped out of a person, we are even further challenged to understand what the consequences are of being an active, of being a handler, of living in this world where a Dollhouse can exist at all. It makes us analyze the world we actually live in, the slavery that does exist, the subjugation real world people actually face. In that way Dollhouse is compelling television.

I wish the show had been on a premium cable channel because there it would have had the freedom to really explore these issues completely unfettered. What's done is done. The show I watched isn't one I'd want to see another season of but I'm glad I saw what I did and I hope it made others ask these big questions they way it did for me.

[ edited by project bitsy on 2009-05-10 23:10 ]

project bitsy | May 10, 23:08 CET

Brinderwalt/Gossi:

So, Dollhouse failed (don't see a second season happening) because it had no fixed identity from week to week. Much like its protagonist. How meta. To quote another Whedon character: "Huh."

tabmke | May 10, 23:13 CET

There's been much critical discussion without bashing going on at Whedonesque. And if there is bashing then posters will get warned and then banned if they decide that they know best.

But I will say something about the fandom. Guys, this is what it's like when there's a Joss show on the air. There's arguments left, right and centre and hey not everyone will have the opinion as you. We've had five years of talking about comic books and we got rusty and we looked back when Buffy, Angel and Firefly were on the air with rosy tinted glasses.

And then when a new Joss show comes along, the newcomers get shocked at the passion it brings about and the oldtimers roll their eyes because they've seen it all before. And then the drama unfolds. Often with very long posts that I have to read. But the important thing to remember is to have fun and enjoy being a fan but not at the expense of other people.

Simon | May 10, 23:18 CET

I'm not shocked at all, Simon. I've been watching Buffy since both she and I were in high school. Whedonesque is your site so I won't argue with you as to what constitutes "critical discussion" versus "bashing". Reading through all the comments I'm already annoyed with the tone some people have taken and they haven't said boo to me. As a result I'm keeping mum on some of my more controversial points of view. I have my own site for that sort of thing and, if I don't like what someone says there it's my dog and pony show so I get to deal with them as I see fit. I hope that makes sense.

[ edited by project bitsy on 2009-05-10 23:33 ]

project bitsy | May 10, 23:33 CET

Hey Newcj.

Personally, I do think that alot of people aren't smart enough to see how good (or at least how deep) Joss Whedon shows are. I'm sorry if this view seems elitist, but I still think it's true.

However, I don't think that everyone who doesn't watch/like Dollhouse is stupid. I think that Dollhouse is Joss whedon's "olives project", since it suits some people's tastes, and gives them what they really want from television, while for others it is distasteful and too bitter.

If Dollhouse was more "accesible" and dumbed down with morally certain characters then I wouldn't be watching it, just lke I don't watch Ghost Whisperer.

I just find it really annoying when people seem to be criticizing Joss for writing an intelligent and interesting show, when, in my case, I usually only like shows that are this way.

mortimer | May 11, 04:56 CET

mortimer, my issue is that I don't find Dollhouse interesting and Mr. David has a point when he says that exploring the moral ambiguities of a practice we all know is wrong isn't exactly interesting.

I would argue that Dollhouse does have morally certain characters, with the possible exception of Echo's former bodyguard and maybe Dr. Saunders. The people who run and work in the Dollhouse are "evil" and Ballard is "good". DeWitt doesn't have to choose between "good" and "evil" every week, she is solidly on the side of "evil" in that what she's doing is fundamentally wrong. Echo doesn't have the ability to choose between good and evil. Joss's shows have been interesting because they balance on that raggity edge between "right" and "wrong" for the characters (prime example: Firefly's "The Train Job"), when you have characters who are so clearly defined on each side of the line, it just doesn't interest me at all. I, too, am not watching "Ghost Whisperer" but I've skipped entire poorly-reviewed episodes of "Dollhouse" without remorse as well.

Barclay | May 11, 12:49 CET

I have to agree that I also do not find the characters morally ambiguous except for perhaps, Ballard. As I have said, they are bad people doing bad things for a bad organization.

I am sure someone has said that Dollhouse was too complex or intelligent, but I have seen far more people that did not consider it up to the quality standards they expect from Joss. I know that until episode 6, I had a hard time seeing Joss's hand in the show. Since then it has seemed more and more like a Whedon show. Of course, I don't think too many Whedon fans would ever want to see Joss dumb-down any of his work, I certainly don't.

[ edited by newcj on 2009-05-12 00:23 ]

newcj | May 12, 00:21 CET

"So I just looked up who he is. Um, if someone had just lent me one of their characters to use in my comic book I wouldn't be writing a blog post on how much I dislike his show. That seems very rude to me"

People had been asking me what I thought of the series. I like to give people honest answers. Is being a hypocrite more acceptable?

There's nothing rude about one writer saying he's not thrilled about the work of another writer. The person is the person and the work is the work, and writers understand that.

It's not as if I said I wanted the series canceled and I think anyone who likes it is an idiot (certainly sentiments I've seen fans express about books that I've worked on.) I would like to see "Dollhouse" succeed because I would like fans of the show to continue to enjoy it, and because I think Joss is a really good guy and should have continued success. Plus it would be nice to see SF gain a toehold in that timeslot considering Fridays seems to be where Fox sends SF to die. Unfortunately viewership has continued to erode and I was simply pointing out some of the reasons I suspect that might be. Now if people want to lob personal attacks because of that, well...okay. They have that right. Sounds rude, though. You may want to castigate them for it.

PAD

Peter David | May 13, 14:33 CET

Thanks, PAD, for walking into the minefield once more. Even when I disagree with you, I always enjoy hearing what you have to say. The last few X-Factor issues have been fantastic, by the way.

Let's all be careful not to make personal attacks/snarky asides, yes? Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion, even if it differs from ours and that doesn't mean that they are stupid or hypocritical or anything else.



Thanks for reinforcing Simon's point. It's harder for people involved passionately in the discussion to differentiate critical discussion from bashing - "tone" is hard to determine from text sometimes and a passionate opinion will give you a strong leaning as to where that tone is which isn't always in line with the intent of the writer.



Well, some of us find them quite ambiguous and some of us don't. I'm somewhat surprised by the black and white stance on this, though I can see why; some people just won't see gray when it comes to certain "bad things".

zeitgeist | May 13, 15:02 CET