Angry Reactions

So you got a review on the Bad Webcomics Wiki... What to do now? Should you take the criticism to heart and try sucking less? Should you maybe delete your horrible mutation off the face of the internet so that it can't hurt anybody anymore? Maybe just cry and kill yourself. Those are all valid choices of things to do when you find a review of your comic on this site. But why do any of that when you can bitch and whine about it?

Over time we have received a number poorly worded retorts from webcomic artists who were displeased with their reviews. These range from long, dramatic walls of text telling us we don't know what we are talking about and that there is nothing wrong with writing a comic about the beautiful love that can be had between a man and his rape victim, to short, sarcastic comments written on tear-soaked keyboards about how little the artist care about our review and the quality of their own comic. Attempts to vandalize, delete or re-edit reviews more favorably behind our back have been made. As well as angry response comics, attempts to hack, redirection of links from our site and attempts to mobilize the comic's fanbase into a personal army attack on us that have all but failed. We even got one death threat! A tactic that has never so far been attempted is simply asking us to delete the review and explaining why you don't think you deserve it. It has never been attempted probably because it would also fail.

Few of our reviews ever get deleted. Those that do are, more often then not, simply bad to begin with and have little to nothing to do with how their target feels about them. However, doing any of the things listed above will not hail any results besides us laughing at you even harder and getting you added to this little hall of shame.

And remember: Calling us trolls automatically invalidates any criticism of your comic and magically fixes all of its flaws (not that it has any).

Addanac City


One day, a new member came to the BWW called hans17. In a fit of non-thinking, he wrote a shitty three-paragraph review of Addanac City. While he banged his head on the wall trying to figure what to do, help was called to fix this stain on the site. In the meantime, George Ford, creator of the comic, found out about it, and motivated by recent negative comments on his site and the BWW, decided the most civil thing would be to feign amusement at the situation: Click for blog post "Hello, Haters! I’m so glad you could stop by. Besides creating this comic strip series and kicking it with the many ADDANAC CITY fans I encounter each day, you guys are my third favorite form of entertainment.

Yes, yes, I know what you say….ADDANAC CITY sucks. The art is infantile. The humor isn’t fit for a four-year old. “Why do you even bother to make this tripe?”

Firstly, because I enjoy it. Secondly, because people out there like it. And lastly (not to mention least of all), because it irritates the heck outta you!"

So, Mr. Ford, one of the reasons you go on with this hit is because you just want to annoy us. Nice way of not giving us any importance.

"I welcome your whining and petty, elementary-school name-calling. You guys make my day because this itty-bitty, inconsequential cartoon that I create evokes so much passion and emotion from you. You hate ADDANAC CITY soooo much, yet you return time and time again just to see how much you hate it this go-round.

That’s fine with me, knock ya selves out. Spend your entire day telling your friends and neighbors that ADDANAC CITY sucks balls. In fact, form a club, coalition, or organization (I’ll even design your official logo). You can even call yourselves the Sentinels Against Addanac City Because It’s Truly Erroneous Rubbish (or SAAC BITERs for short)"

Oh, my sides are aching... really, how long did it take to think this up? Way to counter those immature kids and their elementary-school name-calling. You sure showed them.

"Regardless, I appreciate your constant viewership and, even though you may hate me, my art, my mom, and/or my dog, the name ADDANAC CITY is still on your lips. Taste it, savor it, and swallow, Dear Hater, cuz you’ll be back tomorrow."

Once again, feeling important. It takes a very deluded man to appreciate people just for visiting his site, not caring if they all hate it. Attention craving must make you think wrong.

"And I’ll be waiting for you to entertain me further. :)"

Same here, and I'm not talking about the comic.

"‘Til then…"

The Earth kept spinning, the wind kept blowing, the comic kept sucking, and the review kept developing. Nothing happened. However, energized by the strokes of approval of his fanbase, Ford kept shouting rubbish about his supposed posse of haters. He even made a comic mocking his invisible, obsessive enemies. Sorry Ford, we don't have such fragile feelings. He didn't stop there, though. As a final hit of idiocy, the comic came with this lulzworthy comment, where he finally questions the motives of his imaginary hater squad, and even pulls a JDR. Click for Ford's meltdown "Every now and then, I get a visit from someone who cannot stand ADDANAC CITY. They think that Hank and his counterparts are immature, crudely drawn, and not funny in the least.

Some of these kids have even ganged up with their “clique” to post AC up on their whiny Bad Webcomics site. Hee-hee…. I love to watch children play. They fetch fans so well. Thanks for the free promotion, tykes. :)

While I have nothing against folks who wish to speak their minds, what gets me is when these same people continue to return day after day to prattle on about how much they hate this site.

???????

I’m not saying that you have to come here and stroke my ego and tell me how great and fantastic you consider AC to be, but it really doesn’t make much sense to arrive just to flame, insult, or otherwise b!t&h and moan about the comic. Especially since this is a FREE webcomic and it costs you nothing to stop by here. It will cost you just as much to leave it, too."

DAMN YOU GUYZ, WHY DO YOU DIS MY COMIC IF ITS FREE? FREE MEANS NO STANDARDS! Notice the nod to the BWW. Again, we are just a bunch of kids who piss on things for fun, yet we secretly love his webcomic in secret. This guy will make himself believe anything other than the fact that his comic is shit and needs improving. Also, he seems to be of the belief that bad publicity is still good publicity. Sure, a stream of people who come to laugh and criticize your stuff and then leave forever is all kinds of good business, Ford. Quick, get below your rainbow blanket before you catch a cold!

"I consider coming here to AC just to rant and rave and basically attempt to demean what the rest of us are enjoying akin to me walking into your home and spitting on your floor. It’s insulting and truly in bad taste. If I don’t like the way you host things in your crib, I should have enough sense and diplomacy to merely excuse myself and go elsewhere. It’s that simple."

Criticizing things is like spitting in somebody else's house? Wow, so that's how things work! I guess that explains why there's no criticism in the real world, and critics are just assholes with no sense of respect. This guy must hate Simon Cowell and Roger Ebert.

Jesus, Ford, do you really think you're doing a good job with this comic? Honestly, this is untouchable to you? Well, I guess that settles it. If you can't see the immeasurable genius that Ford is, you should just leave. Obviously, us and him live in separate worlds.

"But, I guess this being the internet, a hater feels confident about barging in where they’re not wanted, welcome, or comfortable. I don’t imagine they would, in real life, pony up to the “cool” table in high school and start talking trash. It would be a whole different ball game then, wouldn’t it? :D"

Obviously, on the Internet, people who dislike things are not welcome. The sign said so on the way in. What an immature child.

Against this, there were two different attitudes in the BWW. One was to shrug it off and move along. The other was to freak out and make the two shittiest comics ever on DrunkDuck. Hans17 did two terrible parodies of Addanac City and the Jonas Brothers (we assume he hated them too), and he even tried to make us review them officially on the wiki. He was banned with no remorse.

The Antillian Chronicles


So someone informed us that Nicholas has written a response to his review a while ago. Which is strange because I periodically look for them on Google and have never seen his. Which makes him implying our site is too obscure for him to notice all the more funny.

In his reply he tries to save face by painting the person who reviewed him as an insane stalker, threatening him and then stalking him back.

I'll just let you guys read it for yourself.

Read and enjoy

I apparently have a hate shrine

One review is a shrine.

"Which is kind of pathetic considering I am the first person to discover it, I think."

Well, we are the first ones to notice your comic so I guess that makes us equal... Wait, no, you also contradict yourself about this later.

"it is at least nominally about my first (and admittedly bad) webcomic attempt "The Antillian Chronicles" but let's face it, it is really about me and what an god-awful piece of human refuse I am."

At least you admit it.

"And it has been following me for a while, apparently. Even though the article is about 52 days old.

I should be more creeped out about this (and I am pretty creeped out.) but I think it's funny that this article consists of months of determined stalking"

HAHAHAHA Oh my god, I have never seen a more arrogant person in my life. Apparently a few minutes of reading stuff on Google is "Months of determined stalking" and one article is a shrine.

"and I only barely know that this Murphace exists ("Hi Murphace, I know you are reading this :wave:")."

He wasn't. I don't think he ever came back and he never let us know about your journal. Meaning your "Obsessed Stalker" forgot all about you literally the moment he posted that review.

"So anyway, fun time whilst me and my friends work out who this Murphace person is. I doubt it will be hard to do."

"Friends" hahaha... It seems we are dealing with a badass Internet detective from Anonymous and his crew... You really got us scared.

"PS I discovered it because it is one of the leading traffic sites to my blog. Since this all seems to be the work of one person that means that they are probably the source of all that traffic."

And this is where I said he contradicts himself. On one hand he says the review is so meaningless that he is the first person to find out about it, but on the other hand, he admits that it is one of the biggest sources of hits, not only for his comic itself, but for the obscure blog linked on his article that no one has a reason to even click.

"EDIT: EPIC FUN UNVEILING TIME YAY!!!! So, I started with the avatar of the wikia account profile which by reverse image search leads to the youtube page which leads by description to ~Mista-Heesh You have been unmasked."

Nice revenge! His article exposes you as a mentally ill moron and you get him back by... proving he is a much better artist than you? Good job.

FYI: I am typing this as I hide in the bushes and watch Nicholas with my binoculars.

Bittersweet Candy Bowl


A few days after a thread was posted (here is the thread in question, if you want to read more) about the comic, the artist's husband showed up on the forum. He argued with everyone, got called out on not reveling straight away who he was, offhandedly insulted a few other webcomic artists, complained about how everyone on Something Awful hates him and his wife, and left.

About a year after this charming display, a review was posted. This time he was back eight hours after it was up with a counter review. This time, he disclosed who he was upfront (too little, too late) and went on to tell us how the review was shallow and insufficient, and giving us a list of flaws in his own comic to comment on, my favorite of which being: "jokes about the idiots in the comment section who crave the worst of the story and want to fuck Lucy."

That is him talking about his fans...

Finally, the review was completely rewritten. The comic's actual creator now refuses to comment on it, so she must be very grateful to her husband for all his help.

Oliver's encore before leaving was commenting on one thread to insult The Oatmeal and tell us that we should write a review. And on another thread to call the creator of the webcomic "Love Me Nice" a bitch (they had a personal dispute years ago).

He still continues to claim that their lack of friends in the webcomic community has nothing to do with his people skills.

Black Jade


"Midgear" found his review and did not like it one bit.

Inside: Things no one cares about.

"So my comic Black jade just made the bad web comics wiki one would think I would be annoyed or pissed, but I just find it funny. I respect reviewers, they make people who create things strive to become better,"

Seems like a pretty mature response, right? Well, keep reading.

"but come on this is nothing but someone screaming at the computer."

Yes, that is exactly the reaction someone has when seeing your comic.

"I will say I did take some things away from the review I'll get a proof reader again (I do need one) and I need to fix this panel (I screwed up on the thumbs) so thank you angry reviewer man or woman"

"Man or woman, or some combination of both if you are a character from my comic or from porno I jack off to".

"for helping me make my comic better,"

He really did make it better by deleting it.

"but maybe you could drop me an email with mistakes, I will fix em' if I can,"

From: BadWebcomicsWiki@hotmail.com To: IlikeToWearPrettyDresses@Gmail.com List of mistakes: Everything.

"I mean we all screw up sometimes"

You screw up all the time.

"and need some help seeing stuff we didn't see at the time.

Anyhow thought I might as well show you all this because I find it funny. hope you are all enjoying the last day of saturnalia."

Yeah, you obviously found it so hilarious that you quit.

The comic didn't last long after that. The author stopped updating for a while, then left a note on the front page telling everyone who is complaining that he never updates to fuck off, then didn't update for a while longer and finally just deleted the whole thing.

Boss Noodle/Chugworth Academy/Chugworth!/U.S. Angel Corps
Reaction to reading USAC

The creator of U.S Angel Corps, Dave Cheung, has a history of poorly handling criticism. In the past, he had tried to vandalize the John Solomon article on Encyclopedia Dramatica where he is mentioned after he had made claims to not caring about being reviewed on his blog. Later he snapped at the owner of the Webcomic Overlook for saying he deserved that review and, finally, the article about U.S Angel Corps on TV Tropes was deleted and it is safe to assume it was due to complaints made by him.

With our site he had a real drama. Back when we were on Wikidot and soon after a review of USAC was added to the index, suddenly all reviews of Dave's comics were removed for ToS violations. Since Dave has a track record of doing this sort of thing, and since we can't think of anyone else who would have any motivation to defend Dave Cheung's reputation besides Dave Cheung himself, we believe Dave was the only person smart enough to complain to the actual administration of Wikidot. Instead of doing what most people did, which was sending abuse reports directly on the wiki which our admins would read, laugh at, and ignore.

To remedy this, after BWW was shut down on Wikidot and before moving to this new host, we contacted the owner of ShoutWiki to make sure these kinds of problems would not repeat themselves. As a special precaution, admin oddguy contacted them again prior to restoring these reviews to inform them that Dave will inevitably contact them to make fictitious threats of litigation and was assured that it should not be a problem.

So for now the reviews will stay where they are and we eagerly await Dave's return. In case the reviews ever do get deleted again, there are multiple copies of every single one readily available in the links at the bottom of his Encyclopedia Dramatica article.

Bridgette's Belly


Recently we had rewritten the review of this comic that was lost that one time the site got fucked up. But after it was written it became apparent that the new review did not match the old one. A quick search uncovered that most of the comic's archives have been deleted. But it also turned up... this thing...

It seems Mr. Fraser was displeased with the original review (probably part of the reason he deleted the evidence) and sent the author an email to refute it tell her off cry and beg us to pity him.

(Spelling and grammatical errors highlighted by me)

Get ready for a sob story "I was going to open with a link to the Portal of Evil's review of Bridgette, but they seem to be down. shame to, I really enjoyed being called a racist. Where they got that Idea I have no clue. you'll excuse my spelling errors, my hands are shaking…"

No, I will not excuse your spelling errors. Stop being a bitch and get a hold of yourself.

"I got a lovely e-mail a few days ago, expounding on the the use of "There". There, Their, and They're it was titled."

It was titled what? Learn to punctuate.

"It concluded with the author claiming that, "reading you writing makes me want to hang myself with my english degree.""


 * Your*

English isn't even my first language and I still share the sentiment.

"I e-mailed back offering rope and a chair, but sadly I received no reply."

"Not that I could afford it anyway".

"I'm no stranger to critisism,"


 * Criticism*

"far from it. My greatest contribution to this world has been as an object of critique."

The word you are looking for is "Ridicule".

"water off a ducks back. (Yes I misspelled "Critisism". so whats new)"

Why didn't you correct it before sending the email instead of pointing it out?

You also forgot the apostrophe in "What's".

"Yes, Bridgette started out as a fan service,"

"But since I don't have any fans I now only use it to service myself".

"YES, I write about teenagers and motherhood, yet I'm a 35 yr old man.

(A little out of touch y'think? or [ insert creepy guy joke here ] ) I don't mind a figg when people find flaws with my work. great, whoopee, so do I." A. What the hell is a "figg"? B. If you find flaws in your work, why don't you ever fix them? C. Yes, you are creepy. But that is not the reason why. D. "yr"? Couldn't you type the entire word? Are two more clicks on a keyboard really that hard for you? "I've been bustin' my ass for seven years now trying to fix what I know is wrong with the story. I just spent last year (and a good amount of money) To promote and increase traffic and book sales from the site. Do you know what it costs to do a convention? S.P.A.C.E. cost me $500 for a two day show and I only made $25. Don't even ask about Mid-Ohio-Con. Some half naked zombie sat on my table and got fake blood on half my stock. Nothing you have said so far is anything I haven't said myself. What bothers me is it's new, and gives me the impression that a years worth of time and money was misspent. I don't know about you, but I'm not some kid with loads of spare time and mommy and daddies money."

Oh god... I honestly don't even know where to begin with this. Do you hear this guy whining?

Let's set aside the poor grammar for a moment. No one cares about some zombie chick who sat on your desk. No one cares how much you spent or how much you made. No one cares about you trying to improve your comic because you have not made one iota of actual change to it. Most of us are not children, yet we are obviously still more mature than you are.

"I've blewn a good amount of time crafting this from seething hatred to pleading for mercy."


 * Blown*

"My better judgement says I should just delete this and let it go."


 * Judgment*

Delete what? The comic or the email? Either one would have been good.

"If you are mere child, no doubt you'll use this to scorn and mock me again. whatever knocks yer sock off."

Well, call me Junior McBare-foot because that is exactly what I am doing. "If not. Then note that I just squandered my time with you. Time better spent on more important things like laundry, making dinner and playing candy land with my son. oh and fixing the problems you see in my work."

We are so honored that you that you have generously graced us with your presence, and set aside time from your busy day of neglecting your child for the sake of drawing more ugly porn you can then try to sell online, so that you can write us an angry letter in which you beg for our mercy and then call us children and tell us we are not worth your time.

You have got to be the stupidest person that has ever contacted us.

"Those who read a critics reviews already have an opinion about the subject. They only care if it reinforces what they think. In short, a critic panders to the arrogance of others in order to bolster there own self worth."


 * Critic's*
 * "Review"* should probably not be plural in this case.
 * Their*

Also, do you mean pander like you pander to your readers with fat, furry porn?

"And arrogance, as we should know, is a symptom of self doubt and insecurity."

Said the man who moments ago called us children and told us he is squandering his time on us. You should pick up a dictionary and look up "Irony", "Hypocrisy" and "Bestiality" while you are at it.

Also, did you mean to say "you should know", or were you using the royal we? I hope it's the latter because some introspection wouldn't hurt you.

"If you also are trying your hand at webcomics. I'd like to see your work.

A.Fraser"

You would like to see our work? Okay!



Obviously this is far superior to your own comic.

Then he wiped his tears away, pointed his nose skywards and went back to butchering the english language using furry porn while his child starves in the next room.

The Chronicles of Loth


On a thread discussing us being bullies, the author of this comic offered his humble opinion:

Click for blog post

"My comic has been "reviewed" on the BWCW. And being reviewed is no big deal, I just found it hard to take some of his critique seriously since he just basically said it's furry and anime and therefor terrible."

It is furry, and it is anime, and it is therefore terrible.

"Whatever, don't read my comic if you don't like it."

"If you don't like the sound of me beating my wife, just turn up the music and close a window".

"The part that I would consider bullying was the person who wrote the review would send me emails and PM's every day to remind me that he hated my comic, art, story, webpage, face, ect. I still have all his "wonderful" messages he sent me on the off chance I'm going to have to get a restraining order on the asshole."

Regarding the second part of that comment: We do not support or condone this. That review was the only review this person has written and was he was probably an idiot driven by some personal grudge. Nonetheless, the comic is still bad so we are not going to remove it.

We ask that nobody goes trolling webcomic artists on our behalf.

Collar 6


The Collar 6 article, despite being about a niche comic with a small audience, created a surprisingly large amount of crying. It began in this thread with non-BWW-members leaping to the comic's defense.

"Is this all you folks do all day? Slashing other people to hell for their ambitions and endeavors?

I see all the things you tear apart but not once have you mentioned anything any of you have done. At least these artists are expressing themselves and doing something positive instead of sitting in front of a monitor, stuffing their face with bon bons and taking out their insignificance on creativity which is beyond their capabilities.

Try doing something constructive. Your criticisms here sound like something out of jealous lesbian immaturity and boredom from lack of ambition and attention from anything in real life."

You heard him folks, a seizure-inducingly colored mock-anime bondage webcomic is both ambitious and an endeavor, and everyone who thinks otherwise is jealous, immature, fat, apparently lesbian, and a failure at life.

The sobbing quickly spread over to the website of Collar 6 itself when, on September 22, 2009, one of the creators uploaded this blog post:

Click for blog post "I keep finding traffic coming from this location here:

http://badwebcomics.wikidot.com/forum/t-177989/collar-6 Which upon closer inspection is a group of people who make it their business to tell others why their work sucks. Included on this list are some of the more successful webcomics out there, such as Megatokyo and VGCats. That No Need For Bushido was included really baffled me, as that artist is just astounding. But I guess it’s forbidden for a westerner to take cues from the japanese and imitate their art form. After all, the japanese never did that with Disney, right?"

This first paragraph is just astounding. Not only does he basically say Megatokyo and VGCats can't possibly be terrible because they have fans, but he also thinks that the problem with shittily ripping off anime style has something to do with him not being Asian.

"I avoided my initial instinct to join the forum and attempt to respond to every comment leveled at me. But I refrained from that because I have a history of behaving with all the grace of a five year old throwing a temper tantrum. No good would come from marching in there guns blazing just because someone doesn’t like what I’m doing. So I digress."

"SO I JUST DECIDED TO POST ON HERE INSTEAD, BECAUSE I KNOW YOU GUYS WILL BE KIND TO MEE :'C"

"I’m going to find these kind of little corners of the internet everywhere. I’m aware of the fact that I picked a subject matter that only appeals to a niche. I’m aware of the fact that my art is crude at best. The story? Oh yeah, there’s plenty to improve there. I’m not a gifted writer, and average cartoonist (or animu artist as is the popular term for me). There’s some valid points among all the criticism here, and I’m not blind to my own flaws. I’m in my first year at this, and hopeful that with time, both my style and my story will improve. Even Penny Arcade was rather crude at first (although I must admit, it was still well-written early on and remains so)."

It's promising that the guy is open to criticism, or at least doesn't have a webcomic superego.

"However, back to the link at hand, too much of this comes across as the idle anger of a young generation that has made it a sort of mission to ‘fix’ what they feel is broken. The tools seem to include college-level mockery, and insistence on personal validity, and basically just mean-spirited ribbing.

To this lot, and to the others like it, I can only ask: Why are you so angry at a guy who is just drawing a comic obviously revolving around a limited subject matter you aren’t interested in? I’m not forcing anyone to read this, least of all you who think it’s not worth your time. So why not just close the page? Are you that irritated that others might enjoy something you consider low-caliber? There is much worse, far more deserving garbage on the internet, or heck, even TV. Reality television, perhaps."

"GUYS STOP CRITICIZING ART THAT PEOPLE POST PUBLICLY ON THE INTERNET OKAY :C GET MAD AT THE TV INSTEAD"

"I guess all I can say to close this up is that I enjoy doing this comic. It is hard work (despite some of the more pointed statements that I’m not trying), but so far, I do not regret it. And I intend to continue writing, drawing, and enjoying myself for as long as possible."

The post has since been deleted from the site, unfortunately before anyone thought to screencap it, but rest assured that every comment made on it by fans was a loving, gentle pat to the writer's bruised ego.

Later, the webcomic site would have the following disclaimer posted:

"DISCLAIMER for the insanely stupid: This is a BDSM comic based in a FANTASY setting. None of the actions portrayed in this comic are meant for instructional purposes in BDSM. It is STRONGLY suggested you do factual research in the BDSM lifestyle before engaging in BDSM activities."

Whether this came about because of the article here on the BWW or not is anyone's guess.

Concession


There isn't much to say about us and this comic. His forum got super mad at us making that review and one particularly crazy fan got into a drawn out slap-fight with us that has been archived in "Concession fan reply" instead of this page. As for Immelmann himself, a long time after someone made another thread about this review where commented:

"This is old news. The forum and I have a history with the BWW, and by now they're not really worth any of your time or energy."

Immy doesn't love us anymore. </3

God's Story


MoonLover left his fans a note regarding us in the comic's comments.

Butthurt imminent. "Hey guys Just thought I oughta let you guys all know, that God's Story has gained enough popularity to be featured on BWW (Bad Webcomic Wiki)"

I don't think "Popularity" is the word you are looking for. Try "Contempt". "There has been floods of comments about how I take light of 'rape' and such back in Chapter 2"

Flood of comments? Good work BWW.

"and let me make something clear,"

OMG... Here it comes... What will it be? A half hearted apology? A dubious disclaimer? A weak attempt to justify his actions?

"I don't care what you think of my story, art, or how my characters are constructed."

NOOO!! HAHAHA! He doesn't care that he's a sick pervert!

I think that statement would be far more truthful if he just replaced the words "what you think of" with the word "About".

"Words and a page directed at how 'awful' my comic is, isn't going to bring me down, specially when such people have nothing better to do than troll around."

First of all, it's "aren't going to bring me down", you illiterate fuck. Secondly, you can write us all off as trolls if it makes you feel better, but all it takes is a pair of eyes to see we are right about you and your comic.

"So throw all the words you want. It's not going to stop me from finishing this comic. It's not going to ruin anything, so keep it up."

Which is why he has not updated for almost a year after he left that comment.

"My comic keeps getting more hits that way :)

~Jason"

More hits? Try any hits. We are the only reason anyone knows who you even are.

After making this brave stand against us, he abandoned his comic and started a new comic... his twenty third comic! Does this guy not have a job?

On a final note, I just want you to know that out of all of his twenty-three comics, "God's Story" is not even the worst. He has another one literally named "Mr. Pedo".

Hearts of wildfire


Upon discovering the article for his webcomic, Charlie Alexander Luna gave this wonderful message to our friendly neighborhood reviewer, Norad Bush:

Click for the tastefully written response  "I see you came to cross path with my webcomic… guess what? I AM NEW YOU Stupid idiot!! I never done stuff like that before… and I do it for fun. I get no profits whatsoever… also it shows that you Yourself can't draw… since otherwise you would realise how hard it is to draw when you never tried before…"

"How dare you tell me my food tastes like shit! This is the first time I've ever cooked in my life, you don't get to judge me! Get out of my restaurant!"

"also… either delete this… or I will… oh… also don't bother trying to ban me… I can make my way around bans… allways have… so shove up your spiteful shit and eat it"

Uh oh, looks like we pissed of a super badass internet ninja here.

"also… Applegeeks is awesome, you may not like it but there is no need to flame an awesome comic… better than the crap you can come up with…

OH YEAH… I WENT THERE! and you know? is funny… because even if my art might be subpar… as well as my vocabulary… at least I got an excuse… english is not my mother language… nor my second… I know 5 languages… how does it feel? yeah…"

Why are you... typing like... this... it looks like... you are really indecisive... or your keyboard... is broken...

Also, Applegeeks is still shit.

"so either delete this entry… or I will be forced to do so on my accord… this is not a threat… nor a negotiation… put your crap somewhere else… people don't need people like you…"

Not being satisfied with throwing moronic threats around like a thirteen-year-old listening to his first rap album, Urashima/Luna/whatever set up a troll account to a) threaten the article's other author, and b) circumvent his permaban imposed by the Las Tittas forum's admins who are still upset by his batshit insanity.

Click for screencap 



YOURS IS COMING... I AM VERY VINDICTIVE... I NEVER LEAVE LOOSE KNOTS LYING AROUND... STOP MAKING FUN OF MY ANIMES...

Let's hope the little fella doesn't chase any of our reviewers down any dark alleyways with a plastic cosplay katana any time soon.

I. M. Hip


After reading the review, Thomas Fay had this to say:

"I.M. Hip got a bad review by the Bad Web comics Wiki. He has a lot of errors: Mr. Albany appeared earlier than November 5th, and breasts are not so important for me, because my drawing technique is freehand. Sorry, but that's the way it is."

After making this somewhat spiteful reply, he actually went on to try to improve the comic. He first fixed some of the errors that were sited in the article, then he asked his readers for advice, and finally he shut down the website and moved the comic to his DA gallery.

Jack (the other one)


Soon after our own review, The Webcomic Overlook wrote one of their own. Catya did not like that one bit. And why would she? She got a well deserved 1/5 stars, and reacted in the same manner that all bad webcomic artists, and her in particular, are famous for. I.E: had a massive meltdown in the comment section, drew and angry response comic, wrote a disingenuous apology and removed the comic... but only after waiting a few months.

During the aforementioned meltdown, she was confronted with the other review of her comic and asked to comment. At that time we had a short, but meaningful exchange:



So, as you can tell, anyone calling her comic bad, or telling her that she should improve, is nothing but a big, nasty troll.

On behalf of the BWW I would just like to say:

;_;

Least I Could Do


On May 16, 2009, the entire review for 'Least I could do' was deleted and replaced by this message: "You should all be ashamed of yourselves, having nothing better to do than to attack people's intellectual property. Why don't you go to the mall and cry over Twilight or something?"

Not only does it tell the writers of the BWW that we oughta be ashamed of ourselves for such awful behavior (honestly, what would our mothers say!), but it also implies that we are teenage girls who enjoy going to the mall and reading Twilight. All that's missing is a comment about us all living in their parents' basements and it would have won the grand prize!

Fortunately, BWW user Norad Bush had the good sense to keep a backup of the article and everything was restored without hassle.

Some time later he made a plotline in the comic called "Haters Gonna Hate" about people who make fun of him. In it, he makes a pathetic attempt to make people feel sorry for him by making the little girl in his comic cry because she read mean things about him on the internet. But since the little girl just looks like like the main character's head on top of a little girls body, this only reminds everyone the only person Shomer cares about is himself.

Lethal: Death Squad Rising


When writer Joeby Gibson discovered his comic was spotlighted on the BWW, he at first seemed to take it like a good sport.

"Glad I could make it to the badwebcomics page and read your thoughts on Lethal. Very insightful and well thought out. I've taken the liberty and posted a link from my twitter account as any press is good press. Thanks again for critiquing with a somewhat open mind and being honest. Keep up the great work!"

But when the members in the forums began to question Gibson's motives as being purely attention-seeking, the butthurt began. Twitter-style.

Click for the Twitter bitch fest and responses from our own Nightgoat

So Joeby's Twitter feed was a hilarious cry fest last night, and it was full of bad arguments to support his comic. Let's take a look at a few of them.

"How do YOU deal w/ "critics"? I just thanked a guy for a poor review & got called out as an attention seeking prick.

Yup. Even though I thanked him for an honest review he called me out as an attention seeking prick. Nice, huh?"

Okay, so Joeby obviously reads this page. First I didn't call him an attention-seeking prick but I stand by Lesbot's observation. Why would someone who isn't seeking attention post a link to a bad review, send the author of the review a message, and then start an all night group session about the review? It's a pretty fair assessment of what happened. All of these behaviors are a cry for attention, which is okay- he is a comic creator and most creators have pretty massive egos, but don't whine about someone noticing your actions. Also notice how he puts the word critic in quotation, he goes on to say:

"How do YOU deal w/ "critics"? I just thanked a guy for a poor review & got called out as an attention seeking prick.

remember those that can, do. Those that can't critique."

This is a common argument and a piss poor one at that. Interesting fact: NightGoat is not my real name, it's a shocker, I know. It's an anonymous handle. Yes, I could very easily be a 16 year-old kid with a lot of free time on my hands, but I could just as easily be a 37 year-old working comic book creator who is sick of seeing his lifelong love and lively-hood perverted by people with no respect for the craft. Joeby has no idea if I can, or ever have- made comics. Why use an anonymous handle? Well there are lots of possible reasons; I could be a coward, I could be one of Joeby's close personal friends that hates his work but doesn't want to start a personal fight, I could be working comic book creator who doesn't want to start personal feuds but does want to defend good comics by highlighting the bad ones. Because we don't know who I am, writing the review off as being done by a "critic" who can't create is a weak argument at best.

Also: if i made a movie and Rodger Ebert called my movie shit, I would take a serious look at where I fucked up. Critic doesn't mean uninformed.

(Edit: Joeby points out that if i am going to quote him I should make sure it isn't a statement made by someone else that he is agreeing with...strange I seem to recall him posting several times to twitter that I called him an attention-seeking prick, when I did no such thing: I was agreeing with someone who said it. Hypocrite much?)

"That's true. They even misspelled my webcomic"

I apologize for getting the title incorrect, however; nothing in the title is misspelled- I guess they don't teach the difference between spelling and diction at the University of Bozeman. (Edit, I did make a spelling mistake in the title. Fuck shit, the entire review is rendered worthless.)

"lol. Even if I'm so angry at womens. Apparently Nightgoat didn't get the memo that Lethal is a bad 80's action film."

I guess I shouldn't expect Joeby to understand why this is a terrible argument. To be able to write a parody of something you have to first be able to write that which you are parodying and you have to be able to write parody, I am not convinced the Joeby can do either of those things. Furthermore this doesn't let you off the hook for not being able to write female characters, or for treating them as objects. Plenty of writers write misogynistic characters without themselves being misogynistic and without making the work as a whole being such. There is a difference between how the characters in the story treat female characters and how the author treats his female characters; Joeby treats all his female characters like objects. And finally to simply state that your subject matter is either "bad" or guilty of a certain flaw, and as such your writing shouldn't have to move beyond it is the worst possible writing sin. You breed in weakness. Joeby isn't the only writer guilty of this, there are lots of them. If you start out saying that this comic is a "bad 80's action film," you will never -as a writer- move beyond it. How does an author expect us to call something good, that they themselves term as bad?

"TIP: You create content for your fans. If someone doesn't like your comic, then why are they reading it?"

Cop out alert. We are reading it because it was put on the goddamned internet. It's out there, in the public now, and no where does it state that we have to be fans to read it. Also how is that a fucking Tip? It should read: "WHINE: You create content for your fans. If someone doesn't like your comic, then why are they reading it?"

"TIP: (cont) If readers don't like a certain story arcs, find out why. Why are they hung up on certain things"

This is more of a tip, and here is a tip in return: They are hung up on them because they are poorly executed.

"I live and die by the fact that if Gigli, The Spirit or any direct to DVD horror movies can be made, then there is a market for anything."

SOME ONE ELSE MADE SOME SHIT SO I CAN MAKE SOME SHIT TOO. You should live and die by the quality of your work, not the fact that some people will pay money for shit.

"but personal attacks? Is Lethal the greatest comic ever made. Hell no! But did I get off my ass and write/ produce it. Yes"

Here he is absolutely correct. The insults in my review weaken the argument. I definitely learned that lesson. Lethal is a terrible comic on so many different technical levels. However, when my review goes into the attacks on Joeby's intelligence, accuses him of masturbating, etc- it loses focus on just how bad the comic is in its craft and the focus starts to shift toward my anger at it. The comic is very bad, but Gibson himself probably isn't. He is no Ryan Sohmer or Keith Buckley, he just doesn't have the skills to do what he wants. In future reviews I will be sticking to a technical discussion of the work much more, and attempting to leave a lot of the insults out of it. I can't promise that I won't ever insult the creators, but I will focus more on why their work is bad, not why they personally are bad.

Overall, Gibson did nothing but show all members of the BWW what a bitching, moaning crybaby he is. The lesson learned? The best way to respond to criticism: don't.

Lovefeast


The creator of "Lovefeast" opened this thread on the "Top Webcomic List" forums to complain about being reviewed.

Here is what she had to say: "Bad Webcomic Wiki?

Anyone here ever heard of it? I just found out about it today. Lovefeast made it on there.

Too bad any decent points it makes are somewhat invalidated by the writing (good thing you don't actually need to be a good writer to post on Wikidot)"

You don't have to be one to make a webcomic either... Case and point.

"and the pillow-fort nature of the website. I'm also sure the people involved in the creation of my special article are the same people who commented here, or at least are related, and they didn't really say anything new/better this time."

Yes, there couldn't possibly be more than one person who thinks your shit comic is shit. It's simply impossible.

"I only regret that Millennium is apparently not bad enough to warrant its own article."

Hahaha... Do you really think that? I read it. It is.

"Also that they can't seem to spell my surname correctly, despite it being at the very bottom of every website I own and design. If that was purposeful, it's not funny. That actually annoys me more than anything else."

I don't know if Norad did this intentionally, but lol...

"The website is entirely pointless. I think sites like those were brought up in another thread about webcomic reviews here. No one cares about bad reviews except people who let their opinions be shaped by them."

... What? What the fuck does that even mean you moron?

"If they wanted to give the author personal feedback on why they think the webcomic is bad, they could use email. Otherwise, what's the point?"

This point is that you are too stupid to take any of our advice and improve. That's why it's better to post this publicly so everyone can just laugh at you, instead of in a privet email, so you can pretend it never happened.

"At least there are other sites that do this and then are actually funny.

I think I just broke some kind of rule about not bringing more attention to things like this, but it's killing my referring hits today so why not."

You're right. Why not? Why not bring more attention to the fact you suck and that people have been flocking over to your site just to see how much. Perfect reasoning.

From then on the thread devolved into a massive circlejerk, where they continued to tell one another that we are all trolls, who only write reviews because we are jealous that our own comics about gay girly-boys with horribly misshapen bodies are not as good as their's. And we were also hilariously white knighted by Ace Plughead and William Greggory, in a display I have no other way to describe but "cute". Although, I am not sure if at the time Greggory was already featured on this site.

The comic itself, which at the time of the review only contained 24 pages, only reached 46 before stopping it's updates indefinitely in 2010. We can't know for sure if this did or did not have anything to do with our review helping the creator to realize this comic is not worth continuing, but we can only hope.

One way or another: Good riddance.

Original Life


What's worse than an author who can't take criticism? When the author's fans lick his boots. Several months after our review of Original Life was posted, Naylor posted an entry on his Livejournal account called "The Kind of Fan Mail I Love". He posted what is apparently a reproduction of a fan letter slamming us.

For the most part we don't concern ourselves with fan reactions. In part because almost every review we write brings about a river of tears on the comics respective forum, and in part because it's simply beneath us. But, seeing as how Naylor himself reposted this thing, it makes it a special case.

The entry reads as follows:

'''Get some coffee. This is long, boring, and poorly written.''' "Hi, my name is (name withheld). I was reading Bad Webcomics Wiki, which is generally entertaining in pointing out blatant flaws in comics, when I happened upon the review of your comic, Original Life. I read the entire reviews, as well as your entire comic, and I must say that I DO NOT understand what they are complaining about!

Their criticism amounts to "asdf they don't have the same views as me!!!! no fair!!!!" and insults about art style from your very early comics, which I must say has improved greatly since the first comic."

What? No it hasn't. Seriously, click the "go to start" button, then the "most recent" button. It's exactly the same.

"In the later half of the article, the criticism devolves completely into personal attacks and accusations of pedophilia (wat?)."

That's not true. We also called him a racist and a misogynist.

"I usually enjoy Bad Webcomics Wiki, but I must say that the article on your comic was entirely uncalled for. I am just writing to let you know that not everyone will mindlessly hate any comic posted on that site,"

You're right. Only people with good taste.

"and that your comic has gained a new reader, regardless of controversy."

"Gained a new reader", didn't you read it before you wrote that letter? Or are you trying to say that you are now going to start reading it on a regular basis to get us back for writing a bad review? In which case I must say: WOW! you really taught us a lesson!

"P.S. In case this surprises you, I am not a very political person,"

If you were, you wouldn't like this comic.

"and I do not consider myself a furry. I just enjoy the comic, even though the wiki article implies your only fans are pedophile animal rapists with a penchant for Ayn Rand."

We did not imply that. We implied that Naylor is a pedophilic animal rapist with a penchant for Ayn Rand.

"Some people will get worked up about anything."

Yes, some people will brake off relationships with their friends for making anti-American comments, fly off the handle at their girlfriends, and delete negative commentary about their comics from their website. I wonder who those some people are.

"<3 (name withheld)"

<3 The Bad Webcomic Wiki.

After saying thank you and stating essentially what I said at the top of this journal post, they added in a following email:

"My realization about the review of your comic on Bad Webcomics Wiki has actually caused me to look back at the other reviews there more objectively. I am beginning to see that many (but not all!) of the comics on that wiki were being unfairly criticized in a similar manner to yours,"

You mean being called bad for being bad? Yes, that is very unfair of us.

"which really sucks, turning away many prospective readers without even giving them a chance to read for themselves."

I wouldn't say "giving them a chance". "Putting them in danger", maybe?

"So, thanks for having a comic that stood up so well against it's critics as to help me realize this! :D"

Deleting critique when you can, pretending it doesn't exist when you can't, and earning a reputation as an insufferable prick and possible racist as a result is "standing up to critics".

By the way, we're not withholding the name on the letter. Naylor is.

Let's ignore the fact that this letter doesn't go into enough detail to explain why the review is unjustified and move on to the really big problem: there's no undeniable proof that this is a genuine fan letter. For all we know, this could be a fabrication written by Naylor to spite us. Maybe it is real, but faking it just seems like the kind of thing he would do.

I particularly like the line, "turning away many prospective readers without even giving them a chance to read for themselves," as if to suggest that we don't provide links to the comics we review, or that we actively prevent people from reading them somehow.

Panty Brigade


We had quite a bit of fun with the reaction to this review.

Boo hoo hoo...

Before the review was even finished the comic's creator caught a whiff of our intentions and posted this: "sup haters. we’re back! sorry for the lack in updates holidays kicked my ass. haha I think there's a page or two left in this arc then its break time till i come up with more shit to make reviewers hate us hahah xD" After the review was published he posted this: (Typos highlighted by us although there were other mistakes that could not be highlighted like when he calls us "thebad comic wiki" for example)

"Best review ever by the most intellectual cock suckers on the face of my ass! !!

haha so it seems some people over at the bad webcomic wiki just cant comprehend the awesomeness that is the goddamn panty brigade. you know what that means right dicks and slits?

WE WIN

HELL YES. obviously they dont understand my ARTISTE’s  mind ;D  Do i feel sad we got tossed into thebad comic wiki? hell no! Think abouut how many comics try so hard to get a reaction and fail. good, bad? w/e we got a reaction! I’m sure someone there will secretly fap to the huge titties. haha! This is sooo hilarious like you don’t even know.

BTW punk has NOTHING to do with being happy with yourself. and has EVERYTHING to do with not giving a shit about what others think/say. oh and also to offend as many things as you can haha. to paraphrase guttermouth at least.

To end this i give a one finger salute and SFW to you all ,

good night!"

Usually we decorate these things with our snarky commentary, but this man's responses are so damn stupid I don't even see a point to it.

After declaring his own victory he tried to fight off dissenters by anonymously replying to people on his own chatroom/shoutbox and having an immature slapfight with them which only resulted in a massive spam/flame-war. Just to be clear: we did not participate nor did we encourage anyone to spam, flood or invade people on our behalf. This somehow just happened on its own. He followed up this victory by not posting anything for a month and a half.

But just as we thought he was dead and gone he returned to make one last reply to us which sadly was not properly archived by the wayback machine. We no longer have contact with the people involved to ask them, but from the replies it seems possible he might have even drawn a comic about us.

But all good things must end and he finally came to his senses and left us this final apology:

Don't feel sorry for him just yet; read on.

"TGPG started on a whim originally made as part of some crazy one man anthology badly named Punk Akibakei Shuffle. It was pretty crazy, I mistook crazy for good. Hehe. And then set up this site, where I ran their first solo story “ASSets that don’t recess” the panty brigade got a lot of bad press via the bad webcomics wiki, I of course acted immature, it happens to the best of us. But as time went on I slowly gained my grounds and realized they were right. So I’m going to officially say I am sorry to those that weren’t hating just to hate.."

After that the comic remained inactive for a while before finally going offline.

Rot in peace, you trash heap.

Finally, he revived the comic yet again. And if you think he learned a single thing or that his apology was at all sincere, then you must be new to this site. The new comic was just as bad as the old one, and when the reincarnation of his abomination got another bad review he responded by pretty much telling the person who made it "lol thanks for the pageviews!" more or less.

Romantically Apocalyptic


A few days ago I received an urgent Email from the shoutwiki administration that they have received a complaint that we are libeling and infringing upon someone's copyrights. At first I assumed it was Dave Cheung, having recently re-added his reviews to the site, but when I asked for clarification I was told that the reviews in question were those of "Romantically Apocalyptic", "Niels" and "So... You're a Cartoonist?". I thought this was then the work of Humon or Tom Preston, but the name of the complainer didn't ring any bells.

It was Vitaly S. Alexius' wife.

Usually this is a section for complaints by the actual author, but this time I figured: "Close enough".

The admin that contacted me informed me that he had asked for specific examples and, since I have yet to receive any new word on the matter, I assume they have yet to get them. He also pointed me to a usable version of the template Wikipedia uses to qualify its own use of copyrighted material so that we could better solidify our use of images under the laws of fair use.

Also, there was no libel in any of those reviews and if there was it would be easy to fix that without deleting the entire review, which is what I believe this complaint was a pathetic attempt to do.

UPDATE

I guess the email didn't work because a week later she left us this eloquent response in the form of an abuse report sent to us-

"You all are a bunch of jealous fucking haters!!!!!!!!"

Maybe she should calm down and go back to nude "modeling" on the internet and hoping an agent would be desperate enough to sign her.

Ryugou


Soon after we commented on his comic being shut down, Joshua took a break from jerking off to try and save some dignity by having the last word (forgetting that he can't because WE have a website).

Click if you are ready for extreme levels of passive aggressiveness. "Much to the dismay and disdain of ED people everywhere, don't celebrate. Ryugou is coming back next year."

We care.

"Got tipped off to the fact that some people are happy my comic was cancelled,"

Yes, "got tipped off". It's not like you were watching every mention of you online like a hawk or anything.

"namely ED and BadWebcomicsWiki. They failed to read the part of the journal that mentions it's eventual return. Guess some people really only see what they want."

No, we saw it. We just realized that the only reason you mentioned rebooting that comic was in hopes that no one will be able gloat over their victory over you. And when you saw that they are doing it anyway, you made this second journal to try and make it look like you still won.

So let me say it again: the overwhelming negative criticism of your comic made you end it to make people stop making fun of your poor art skills. We won. Next time try improving.

"If they were being honest, their disdain has literally nothing to do with ME, it's because I defended somebody else's right to an opinion and hurt their little baby feelings."

"EVERYONE JUST HATES ME BECAUSE I LIKE TOM PRESTON!!!"

Yes, your bad webcomic, which you ended because you admitted it was bad, has nothing to do with the article about you on a site called "The Bad Webcomic Wiki". But like you yourself just said: "guess some people really only see what they want".

"BUT anyway yeah it's going to be redone bigger and better."

Doubt it.

"Bring on the shitstorm,"

Again: we care.

"ladies and germs of the troll community,"

"Anyone who calls my bad art for what it is must be a troll".

"it's gonna have fanservice,"

*GASP!* REALLY!?

"action, bloodshed, and (le gasp) anthropomorphic style characters in it,"

You can just say "furry". We all know you're a furry.

"whether you like it or not."

Or don't care.

With that, he finished his journal and went back to drawing porno.

It is a truly sad thing that we kind of jumped the gun with this review, because soon after it was finished, more embarrassing things happened to or were discovered about this person. One of his gay porno drawings (which he still claims are not gay) was featured on the front page of the Rule34 website, his main character was discovered to be plagiarized and it was found out that he and his brother draw pictures of penises together (incest? I can't prove it, but no one can blame you for being suspicious).

But it's not all bad, Joshua. You should take pride in being one of the few artists to stop making their comic when they realize it's bad. If only you could also stop being so mad about it, you could maybe get started on the road towards improvement.

UPDATE:

Recently he posted a journal on his DeviantArt account responding to our response. Sadly you will not be able to read this hilarious denial by a documented lier because he deleted it 9 hours later!. Instead, he posted a second journal that said this:

"The journal I posted replying to BadWebcomicsWiki yesterday was, as my friends pointed out to me, not a wise or worthwhile endeavor, and I apologize for it. Thanks to my good friends here for their timeless advice. Love ya'll. 'It takes a great deal of courage to stand up to your enemies, but a great deal more to stand up to your friends.' --Albus Dumbledore"

Besides the hilarity of a man in his late twenties quoting a children's book and thinking it is deep and inspirational, what is more funny is the reason why he actually deleted that journal. I was able to catch a glimpse of the journal before it was gone, and, more importantly, the comment section. There I noticed one of his aforementioned fans begging him not to rile ED and BWW because it puts his fans in danger.

What a bunch of chicken-shits.

Sandra and Woo
The creators of Sandra and Woo decided to demonstrate their maturity and ability to handle criticism by temporarily redirecting all traffic from Bad Webcomics Wiki to a favorable review on NotMadComic.com so none of the links in our review would work anymore.

''Yes, the reality that some people might not like your comic does suck, doesn't it? Best to pretend such dissent doesn't exist.''

 Update 

To remedy this we uploaded all linked strips and embedded images to imgur. Recently we noticed that the embedded images have been removed. Since we have never had this problem with imgur before it is safe to assume that it's creator reported the images. Luckily, this was just before we moved sites anyway and now all images are uploaded directly to the wiki.

For a moment we considered first linking everything to the site again (since it is the old BWW that is being redirected) just to see how long it will take before we are blocked again, but decided we are too lazy for that.

However butthurt the author might have been over our criticisms, he did not disregard them. Looking over the archives, he has deleted some strips and modified others. I guess he realizes we were right.

Skull Boy


After seeing the original version of the article for his comic, 'Skull Boy' creator William J. Gregory decided to take a hiatus on updating, and send BWW member Mediocrity this message;

Click for the message "Subject: Hello Date sent: 16 Sep 2009, 23:40 GMT Dear Scott Foss,

I waited a very long time before I decided to write a reply about your review, as I wanted to make a calm, well thought out response with an even and balanced perspective."

"I needed some time to gather my emotions. *sniff*"

"This is not hate mail, I just want to set some things straight and get some stuff off my chest. I'm sure you can spare a few moments to read a simple note. I think you owe me that at least, what with an entire page dedicated to showing how worthless my work is.

First, I just wanted to let you know I am archiving the comic Skull-Boy to make more time for Fish Quarry. But, I'm telling you this so you know it's NOT because of your cold review and pitiless comments, I've been tired of Skull-Boy for a long time now. The review, if anything, was the final nail, or realization that it was time to get it over with.

Second, you realize my site only generates, like, 200-500 unique visitors a day, 900 on a really good day. That's not even enough to get real sponsors on my site. I'm not a big shot, hell, I'm not even a medium shot. So, it's very obvious your review was made for the soul purpose of hurting me and me alone. I think it's a shame you would waste your time trying to hurt someone who's a small time artist much like yourself. Not only that, gather other people to single me out and talk about what a hack I am behind my back."

"Why are you picking on my webcomic on your webcomic review site?! IT'S BECAUSE YOU HATE ME ISN'T IT?!"

"Third, Skull-Boy was a pet project at best, I just did it for myself. It's completely self-indulgent and don't get me wrong, you're totally right, it's crap. The story's a mess, as is the art and the characters are flat. But why wouldn't it be? I started it when I was 15. Do you like what you made when you where 15? Oh wait, I guess you would, because you're 16, which brings me to my next point. What makes you think you know anything about me, my work or webcomics for that matter? Not to be mean, but you're barely getting started yourself. Who gave you the right to judge me?"

"Yeah, I know it's shit! So what?! STOP JUDGING IT!"

"I can't expect you to understand what it feels to be singled out the way you did to me, but if you're even the slightest bit of an empathetic human being, you will understand that all the hatred you built up was completely meaningless and only accomplished hurting the already frail confidence of an artist who started out much like yourself and is only a stone throw away from where you currently stand."

Note: Mediocrity's first comic used to have an article on this wiki. He didn't cry about it. Man the fuck up.

"If you don't understand that, then I especially don't care what you say or think of me. If you feel glad that my comic is being archived and you feel like you've won, eager to smash the confidence of another fellow webcomic artist, then you're a very little man and I feel sorry for you, which I seriously hope isn't the case. All I really want is for you to have the dignity to leave me and my friends alone.

I don't hate you, let's try to keep it that way before this gets ugly. ~ William J. Gregory"

Surprisingly eloquent for someone who created a VGCats fancomic full of dead baby jokes.

 UPDATE: 

A few months later, William rebooted his comic again. And by "rebooted", we mean "continued without improving a single thing. Only now on the SNAFU site". After joining the illustrious company of Bleedman and Donald Wayne Lozen, he saw this thread. He then sent us yet another whiny note.

Click for more bitching "Hi, this is William, creator of Skull-Boy,

I took a break from ripping off everything evar in my sleep to read the replies to your topic, first off thanks for letting people know I've moved, I've been trying to get that fixed on the review of my old comics for months. I cannot reply to your topic, even though it's about me. That's pretty damn ironic when you think about it, "NO, we're talking about you, you can't talk about you, only we can!" so I need to ask you… what the hell is FTS? Full Text Search? If I'm being accused of ripping something off, again, I'd like to at least know what it is so I can go have a good cry about it.

Thanks in advance, William"


 * A. We don't remember what FTS stands for.
 * B. That is not what "ironic" means.
 * C. If you want to reply, feel free to make an account and post on the forum, and we will feel free to make fun of you and post about it in this section again.
 * D. Stop crying.

Can't wait for the next one.

So... You're a Cartoonist?


Tom Preston briefly mentioned us in a journal.

""The few reviews that exist of my various web comics tend to be pretty negative. It's very apparent that the writers tend to be aware of my "history" and either cited stuff about me that has no bearing on the comics themselves, or tried to nitpick but ended up failing (i'm looking at you badwebcomics.wikidot.com for citing copy/paste but referenced an image which wasn't copy/pasted as your example)""

Thank you, Tom, for helping settle a long debate about that picture. A replacement has already been found and it took all of five seconds to find it. Also, I think you are confusing "nitpicking" with "pointing out glaring flaws".

Sore Thumbs


Chris Crosby did not respond to our review of his comic Sore Thumbs. But a few months later, when we made a new thread to consider reviews for other works by the Crosby Brothers, he showed up to do what had to be the most failed attempt at defending one's self in the history of the internet.

Here are some of the things he had to say:

Click to read "I write CROW SCARE (with Brew McCloud), not Bobby. Bobby hates CROW SCARE.

I also have been writing and drawing a comic strip daily for over a decade called SUPEROSITY (http://www.superosity.com). You probably won't like it either, but > that's my "true" writing style."

"When I write the way I want to write I make things people won't like." Good job standing up for yourself.

"I enjoy working on SORE THUMBS and WICKEDPOWERED, but they were written primarily for the money, not because they're the kind of thing I love to write. > They both are purposefully created to be as dumb and pandering as possible. Heck, WICKEDPOWERED was a paid advertisement for a handheld laser > manufacturer. And CROW SCARE is intended to be a SCI FI Channel original movie illustrated on cheap newsprint."

"I don't care if I make crap. I just want money."

"Yes, I haven't aimed very high thus far."

"I have no standards."

"Bobby's goal with everything but PUPKIN and +EV has been to write fantastic blockbuster movies in graphic novel form. Maybe I should try that…"

He has failed miserably each time, and so will you.

After admitting that his comic is bad and that he's doing it all for money, and laying out his brothers insane aspirations, he topped everything off by smugly offering us to make a comic, which he will graciously allow to be hosted on his site, and left.

You can read the rest here.

We are still waiting for Bobby Crosby to show up.

Teacher's Pet


Soon after its inception "Teacher's Pet" was being hailed as one of the worst webcomics ever created. It lasted for a few miserable years before being deleted (probably as a result of all the negative criticism it was getting).

We discovered this comic soon after it began gaining attention and a thread was made to discuss the possibility of writing a review. Even before a decision could be made, the two girls who were making the comic saw fit to write a long blog post about our unsolicited advice.

Get your tissues ready  "Everyone's a Critic...

Everyone is especially a critic when you ask for it... But sometimes unwarranted critiques find their way to you."

We didn't even write a review yet! No one showed you that thread! You went looking for it! How exactly is that finding our way to you?!

"My friend Sarah and I co-write and in some ways co-draw the comic Teacher's Pet, which follows the lives of two college-aged superheroes who are best friends, but whose superhero alter egoes are mortal enemies."

"Egos", not "egoes".

"This is an idea we got during the planning for a party -- and we have managed to turn it into a webcomic of which we have written about 14 chapters, though only 1-4 are available online right now. Anywayyy...

A website called "bad webcomics wiki" has seemed to find us (HOW?!), and has decided we have made their list. They haven't officially reviewed us yet, but if their forum post is any indication it won't be pretty. They doubt our age (and apparently our sanity) and say that pretty much everything about the comic sucks. Here's why that bothers me...

One, because well... I'm a fragile artist. Wah wah and all that."

Yes, exactly.

"But really, I try to work really hard on my writing,"

It doesn't look that way.

"and I have never done a comic before."

That, on the other hand, is pretty obvious.

"I'm figuring it out as I go, but I never look at a script and go, "meh, that's good enough." So the work they tore apart was my BEST work as far as comics go,"

Wow... this?! This crap is the best you can do? Are you five years old or something?

"and I'd like to think that I'm improving as I go. I can say the same for the primary artist, who has also never done a comic before. We both try very hard,"

Again...

Improvement? - not seeing it. Trying vary hard? - Nope. Never done comics before? - That one I can see.

"and we never ASKED to be torn to pieces."

No one ever does. Few murderers turn themselves in. If people were able to recognize how bad they are, ask for help improving and implement that help, there would be no need for this site and no need for us to be having this discussion.

"Two, I'm a writer, musician and hopeful English teacher. Sarah's a musician and therapist and athlete. None of those read "visual artist." This isn't our medium, but we're doing our best."

Your best is not good enough. Even for someone who is not a visual artist, your work is not good enough. Your work would not pass muster if you competed in a comic making competition organized by drunken hobos.

"Three, if you look at chapter one and then look at chapter four, we have both come a long way in a short time."

Stop lying.

"Saying "you suck" is like saying that all the improvement we have clearly made counts for nothing."

We have vary different definitions for the word "clearly". So yes, your snails pace worth of improvement counts for nothing. Less than nothing even.

"We are genuinely trying, and they don't care. They just want to take a dump on our efforts and make us feel bad."

No you are not, no we do not and not at all. We want you to improve. If you can't handle that, then quit... Oh, I guess you did. Good work!

"Five,"

How did you jump from three to five?

"what "sucks" is so subjective.

Are people really yellow with huge overbites and four fingers? No, but The Simpsons, anatomically incorrect though they may be, will always be my favorite show. It's not fair to say something is "bad," when what "bad" is has no remotely clear definition."

Yes... Compared to Hitler, Osama bin Laden was not so bad! In fact, he was a pretty cool guy! You're right, It's all subjective.

"Okay - I know I've been hard on things, in the same way that badwebcomicswiki hates on us. Like Twilight. But that's because Twilight isn't well-written OR a good influence on its readers. Not only do you have to interpret Twilight as you read it, you have this horrible, dysfunctional, even abusive relationship staring at you from the pages -- and these terrible ideals are glorified! I maintain that if Twilight were a Lifetime movie, Bella's friends and family would have had an intervention and removed Edward from her life. The creepy guy who "loves her a little too much" is not supposed to win. No. That's not okay. That kind of relationship should not be what young readers want to pursue, and yet thousands of teenage girls are out there looking for their Edwards."

OH MY GOD! What does this have to do with ANYTHING?! Who the hell asked you? Why are you using this reply to us to give us your review of fucking Twilight!? Who cares?!

"So it's justified in saying Twilight sucks, I think. Our story, however, is about friendship, tragedy, moving on, and good vs. evil -- while often questioning where evil comes from and what actually makes something or someone "Evil." We.... might not have gotten to all that just yet. I'm wondering if my pacing is off -- but that's the downside of publishing as you go."

Wow... so you start with saying all opinions are subjective, go off on a tangent to prove that "Twilight", hated as it may be, is considered good by some people. Then you arrive at the conclusion that it objectively sucks, but your own comic is fucking awesome. What a bunch of stupid, hypocritical bullshit. Are you even reading what you are typing?

"In conclusion, unwarranted critiques by self-proclaimed experts are not nice. Cut that out."

In conclusion, it is only unwarranted if we try to force it down your throat, and if you can't handle it, either grow some thicker skin of stop sucking so much.

Listen girls, I know that you have long since deleted that little trash heap that you called a comic, but if you ever stumble upon this page, I want you to know that if you indeed tried your best, then we appreciate that. But your best was not nearly good enough. Not by any standard. You can't possibly not see that.

I would like to say something nice and reassuring to you because you seem like nice girls, but I honestly can't. Your comic was bad beyond measure. It wasn't even at the point where its quality was somewhat debatable. If it had, I might have been able to understand your righteous indignation over being criticized. But, for someone who made something so utterly horrible, you really have a lot of nerve complaining when someone calls you out on it. Especially when a review was not even written and you went looking for responses to your comic on your own accord.

People who make something bad might have some right to contest the criticism they receive, but people who make something irredeemable need to take criticism in stride and learn to shut the fuck up.

Warmage


When the author of this abomination noticed the traffic coming to his site from us, he contacted the review's writer to leave him a "thank you note"... Smugness oozing out of every pour

"Hey I just wanted to say thank you for the Blistering article you wrote on my webcomic WarMage! Well Done! Also thanks for the Links to the Old webcomic, but I eventually started it over again on Drunkduck. http://www.drunkduck.com/WarMageRebirth/ anyway, Thanks for the Hits to my website And I'll post links to your article! Have a great Day!" Not content with this, he felt the need to leave a second reply of this sort on his Facebook page which read: "I got a Scathing Review on the Old WarMage which basically Hashed out the reasons why I started the Project over. It gave me alot of Hits on My sites and I did send a thank you email to the author."

Still not satisfied, he opted to make sure he wasn't left with any dignity which might have been left over if someone mistook his replies for a genuine "thank you" note. So he created for us our first ever video response. Unfortunately, it was removed before any one of us could save it/watch it/make fun of it. All we know now is that it was titled "nosuchthingasbadpress". So to you, my dear "Dumok", I say: Enjoy your pageviews. Enjoy the flood of people that have rushed to your website just to see how awful you and your comics are. Enjoy your momentary "popularity" comprised of people who laugh at you. And remember: Every hit is worth one internet dollar! And if you get enough of them, you can buy the fuck we don't give.

--


 * Back to front page
 * Back to the review index
 * Back to response categories