Irregular Reaction

This page is a sub section of the Article Reactions page. Since not all the responses we get are negative.

 Reactions on this page include: 


 * Responses to reviews that were deleted.
 * Responses that thank us for writing a review or just don't act like twats about it.
 * Things we are not 100% sure were our fault.
 * Otherwise strange or confusing responses.

---

Dare Sensei
In irregular section because - Didn't bitch about the review One of our members contacted one of the artists of the comic and this is what he had to report-

"I've just showed Pietro the review and he doesn't mind that Dare Sensei is here. In fact he said that Neallyriceguy can review all of his comics and he wouldn't mind. I also asked if there would be a chapter 3. His answer was and I quote: "Not so sure.. is up to kumiko, who wrote the story ^^"."

That is all there is to say about this really. The comic itself, by the way, is completely gone and only leftovers of it remain on the artist's DA page.

Darkwing Beyond
In irregular section because - The artist's actual reaction has been lost At some point the creator of the review for Darkwing Beyond notices that the creator of the comic itself had commented on the review he had written. He notices this, but did not bother to inform anyone. He only edited the review to mention this fact so by the time anyone noticed his edit the actual comment was long gone.

All we are left with is this quote from the review: "When he did eventually discover this review he did take it in (partly) stride, even pointing out some of his own flaws I had missed." So all we really know is that AkumaTH was (to some degree) displeased with our review, but unfortunately not what he actually had to say.

Pity.

Femmegasm
In irregular section because - Didn't bitch about the review



When "Pembroke" found out about his review he had this to say:

Click To Read

"Check it out! The Bad Webcomic Wiki has given me a far more favorable (yet still negative) review! Yay! I suck less!"

After that he gave the review a brief and friendly mention on his site, and that was it.

So he proved that, even though his comic may not be perfect, at least he is not an ego driven douchbag like most of the people we review. Even when people complained about the review all he said was this:

"I was actually rather pleased with this review. It was very constructive and inspired me rather than depressed me. In short, it was surprisingly well written and like you said, fair."

" Some guy: well at least your comic isn't as bad as Ctrl+Alt+Del  Pembroke:  And if it ever did get that bad, I'd hope that someone would shoot me and put me out of my misery."

"Well, when my site stats show a huge about of hits coming from a particular site, I can't help but be curious as to what the commotion is all about. Also I don't mind them hating on my anymore due to the fact it works against them. In short, every time I get a bad review a ton of people come to my site to see what the big deal is about, and a decent amount of them stay and continue to read my comic. In short their hate benefits me. Humorously positive reviews get me less views... go fig. That and this guy was at least constructive in his criticism rather than just being a hatemonger, so I didn't mind this review at all. In fact, I oddly kinda' liked it. I also like to sometimes read what people think, even if I don't agree."

So thank you Robbie for being such a good sport about this. You are a shining example of how to take negative criticism without looking like a twat. We wish you luck and hope our review will help you make your comic better.

Godspeed.

Foreskin Man
In irregular section because - Continued the comic thanks to a prank



We had a strange little story with the creator of this comic. At the bottom of the review there was a request to try and send an E-mail to the creator pretending to be a fan to ask him to write a chapter where the hero fights Arabs.

After two years of being inactive the comic posted a new chapter that occurs in Turkey...

Is this our doing? No way to know except to make sure by repeating the result.

You know what culture has circumcisions that he has yet to insult? Australian aboriginies. [mailto:mail@foreskinman.com Here is his email again]. If you want to see if this was actually our fault, Email Matthew and mention that to him... Good luck!

Harkovast
In irregular section because - Wrote the review about himself



We had a whole soap opera with Herovast. Let us just read what he had to say.

Click To Read

"This is an interesting one with a bit of back story I need to tell. Me and my mate Kev made bad reviews for each other's comics ages ago on the Bad Webcomic Wiki because we thought it was funny to insult each other. You can read the one I wrote for him here. He wrote one for me but it got edited by someone who wasn't very funny who tried to do a sort of commentary about getting bored and making a cup of tea because the comic was dull. It wasn't very good so I reverted it. Little did I realise, the BWW is much more of a members club than most wikis, and the person whose edit I reverted was kinda important on the site. I immediately got banned and the review was deleted entirely (they decided the comic was not actually that dreadful on their forum. They didnt think it was very good, but not bad enough to warrant a page.) Well...I lasted longer on that wiki than I did on Conservapedia at least! Anyway, for some reason it got put back up, along with some commentary of the whole "removing, reverting" thing (which seems weird to me on a wiki, but its their site.) Anyway, its basically Kev's original bad review but with more added, changed around a bit and more pictures. I took the original Kev bad review down from the hall of shame because it seemed a bit like cheating (since he did the bad review as a joke I was in on.) But now its been approved and edited by others, I feel okay reposting it here. I will give a link in case it gets updated in the future-"

So that's pretty much it. They wrote reviews about each other as a prank/ploy for attention, we figured it out, the review was either deleted or lost when the site was hacked. But, since the review was good and the comic is bad, it was restored form a copy they posted on their forum.

The only clarification we need to make is that Harkovast was not banned because he reverted the edits of a more "important" member. He was banned because he reverted them without explaining why, and then, when the changes were made again, he reverted them a second time without saying a word. Since everyone already knew who he was they assumed this was some stupid prank and just banned him rather than bother trying to figure it out.

Bottom line- Thank you Harkovast for saving us the trouble for writing a review about your little abomination, and thanks again for helping us restore the lost review.

<3

Harvest
In irregular section because - Partially deleted the comic without responding



Two days after the review was posted the comic was removed from SmackJeeves. The comic is still up on two other sites, but this is a good start.

We can't be sure it was deleted thanks to us, but the timing seems suspect.

Heartcore
In irregular section because - Relatively mature response



The creator of this comic showed up a day after the review was posted to ask some questions and request advice. Click To Read "Hello! This is the author of the mentioned comic, and I figured some of you guys'd appreciate a response. I tried responding to the topic at hand to avoid clutter, but eh. I agree with the bulk of the review, ESPECIALLY in the earlier parts of the comic. Trust me, I am fully aware of the flaws, as you can see:"

A link "I'm curious what brought the writing from "okay" to "bad" in the forum topic VS the review, as I'd love some suggestions! (As a whole, I know the intro needs a can of polish.) As for the art YEAH trying my damnedest to improve, I like to think the comparison up there is a step in the right direction. Hopefully anyway, har! Any critique is appreciated. (Also yeah the ridiculously huge tits bit is primarily a commission thing. Also yeah I'm hella gay despite being married to a dude.) Really the only thing that baffled me is the original character/Chrono bit. But in the end that's far from important anyway so WHATEV.)"

We did what we could trying to help her. We doubt she will actually improve, but at least she took the time to make an account and pretend to try. That is far more than most people do.

Legendary
In irregular section because- Didn't bitch about it and deleted the comic



Shortly after the review of Legendary was written, its creator showed up on the forum to explain himself:

"I realized it was crappy a little bit before I stopped, and I always meant to go back and delete it, because it's frankly really embarrassing having my real name tied to that shit. (Speaking of which, could you maybe edit my real name out of the wiki article?)"

He has completely deleted the ComicGenesis archive of Legendary. On the bright side, this may be the only mature response we've gotten from a creator we've reviewed. After all, we do say that if your work isn't good enough to show off, you shouldn't show it off. The downside is, now our review of Legendary is full of broken links that make us look like fools. Well played, Ol' Rob Z.

Lucky Dawg
In irregular section because - Review was crap and was deleted but the response is still hilarious



Rooting around google we found a really old post on some comic we never heard of about a review we didn't know existed. The creator first pointed out he noticed there was an empty review page about his comic, and when that caused whoever wrote it to try and continue it he wrote a review of the review on his blog. Finally, whoever wrote the original thing just deleted it and was never heard from again and the blog posted a final victory note.

Two years later we found the blog buried somewhere deep within a google search and it mentions getting a massive spike in traffic from that one line review. So to call this comic unimportant would be an understatement. In truth, the review itself was pretty crappy. We have no idea who wrote that article or why. The person who did it did not post on the forum to ask anyone if he should write a review of the comic and quit soon after changing his mind. However, the comic is, in fact, bad.

Myo Min Myo
In irregular section because - Actual mature response



I am hesitant to call this a mature response since the review ended in praise and she didn't try to defend her old comic which was indefensible. However, she seems like a reasonable individual so i'm not going to read too much into this. This is what she had to say:

"I just got informed that my very old webcomic “Myo Min Myo” has got it’s own review page on the badwebcomicswiki!

Ironically, I basically agree with more or less everything written on the page - that comic is the worst thing I’ve ever done.

But the part that actually makes me happy is the Conclusion part:"

So again, good work and good luck.

Sarah Zero
In irregular section because - Not the best reaction, but tame by Ace Plughead standards How much longer are going to keep crying about this? Soon after the review was posted "Ace" asked to make an account on the site to talk about it. For once I will not bother posting quotes because what he said was long and boring... If you want to read it anyway, you can find the forum thread here-

http://badwebcomics.wikidot.com/forum/t-261185

What happened was he gave a very unconvincing and confusing explanation as to why his comic is bad, talked a bit about Grey's Anatomy for some reason and got told everything he thinks is wrong. But he managed to remain relatively calm throughout, which is an improvement for him so I am not placing this in the "Angry Reactions" section.

The thread died quickly after he stopped responding and he continued hanging around our forum. Later he mentioned everyone who has criticized him so that he could thank them and even defended us on some forum in the thread about our review of Lovefeast, saying:

tl;dr

"Sarah Zero was one of the FIRST webcomics to be ripped apart on that site. I think it was added just after CAD was.

At first, my feelings were really hurt cuz of the then-recent assbeating I took over on a very popular forum. At the time, it was like compounding insult to injury to insulted injury.

But now, well over a year later, I'm totally over myself and I have a fresh outlook towards criticism. Part of my epiphany came from listening to Kevin Smith's SmodCasts where he discussed, at length, dealing with and overcoming his personal demons and internet hate regarding the "poor" opening for Zack and Miri in the fall 2008. Smith got beyond responding personally to the opinions of others and learnt to embrace people's honesty, candour and vocal passions with respect, dignity and appreciation.

With SZ, there are still more and more sites, blogs and forum threads popping up every day, heartily bashing SZ. It's actually kinda koo now. Most of these people are quite funny, witty and/or insightful, and I'm kinda flattered that anyone bothers to discuss SZ at all, cuz for the most part, SZ is sooooooooooooo fucked-up, under-the-radar and obscure that it's quite flattering when somebody says that SZ is the WORST OF THE WORST out there.

Over time, I've gotten to know better and actually LIKE some of my biggest detractors. Some of them showed tons of initiative by making hilarious SZ diss comics, and/or send me thought-provoking emails asking hard questions about things I hadn't ever given any thought to. And I was particularly crestfallen when one webcomic diss blogger actually stopped updating. I kept E-mailing him, sincerely hoping he'd come back. Some of these cats who've ripped me new orifices still visit SZ daily, know my every move on the intarlulz and even follow me on Twatter (perhaps ironically) and speak to me as though I were one of the gang.

In the past, I was a sissy whiny faggot douchebag when it came to dissent. But I learned a lesson, just like Sarah did, to EMBRACE criticism and critics. Some of the harshest words spoken to me have turned out to be some of the most important and useful I've ever heard.

It may seem weird, but some people can be against us AND still be with us at the same time!

Keep on keepin on, Senshuu!

Sorry for the long rant, everyone, tl;dr."

"Complaining about people complaining about people complaining.

That's a whole new level of meta."

"Yeah, you bring out a lot of good points, especially the part about doing the site and reviews for FUN. The articles are fun to read and fun to write! It's fun to make jokes, deconstruct the things we consume, have a couple laughs and move on.

I visit the WW regularly, read pretty much every new review that comes out, I discover tons of new comics and I learn a lot about how to identify and hopefully correct certain problems in my own work. The WW is a great resource for me, and also it's a really fun read, updated regularly, and the addition of the "how-to-improve" type articles are a nice touch, showing a deep commitment to webcomics as a craft. I also really like seeing things from the READER perspective. As a CREATOR, that's one thing I'm really really weak at in SZ.

It's koo to have one centralized place where people can go to learn stuff about webcomics. The WW site has grown exponentially since its early days, and I know the tons of hard work that goes into the site maintenance. It's really come a long way! I'd love to see what the future holds for the WW."

"We can't control what others say about our webcomics.

It's not our place to tell anyone how nice, how honest or how whatever to speak about our work.

The only thing we can control are our REACTIONS to what is being said."

This became a recurring theme with him. So it seems "Ace" learned how to deflect criticism by thanking everyone for it even though the comic itself became more and more of a meta narrative about how people still make fun of him for that meltdown he had a few years ago and call him pretentious and continues to be that way to this day.

What he hasn't learned was how to use that criticism to make his comic one iota better.

Oh, and after a link to a tumblr mocking his comic was posted on our facebook it was soon reported and closed... coincidence?

Shayla the Pink Mouse
In irregular section because - Didn't bitch about it



Shane Nelson commented on the review with surprising maturity for someone who draws a furry sex comic. His only comment regarding the review was: "sad but true." Even though he admitted the review was right about him and his comic, he failed to delete it.

Finally the domain expired and he did everyone a favor by letting it be. Thank god. Sadly, the comic was later saved and archived by some other gross furries.

You can see the FurAffinty journal entry in question right here.

YU+ME: Dream
In irregular section because - Review was crap and was deleted but the response is still hilarious



Some time ago we had a review up on this site about a comic called "YU+ME: Dream". After it was made we got a complaints from a couple of its fans that the review was poorly written and probably done by a disgruntled fan who was unhappy with the direction the plot was taking. After further inspection we realized they were probably right. The article was indeed pretty bad, focused on a single flaw and the the comic itself may have not deserved a review in the first place (although I am beginning to doubt that after having to look at it in search of a picture to put up here). And so, the page was subsequently deleted.

But not before the author could comment about it with a childish response. Click To Read "Greetings to anyone coming here from the Bad Webcomics Wiki, the site that says it’s awful to write about yourself in your personal journal!"

It's not really personal if you post it up on the internet.

"Just for you, I’ve decided to go back to the oh-so-original “secret lesbian schoolgirls” plot. That was so much more original, right? It hasn’t been done dozens of times already. Screw this Dream World stuff, I should totally write what you want me to write!"

You know what else is original? Dipping your genitals in molten lava. Don't confuse "Original" with "Good". So whoever is making this comic should probably thank her fans. They are obviously smarter than her.

The Zombie Nation
In irregular section because - Actual mature response



For the first time in the history of the site we got a replay for a webcomic author we reviewed that was not either an angry rant, a lame attempt to convince us they don't care or spiteful attempt to thank us while being passive-aggressive at the same time. Click To Read "Ouch! I won't lie, that was a rather painful review and I do feel fairly skewered by the reviewer. All the more so because there were some very valid points that were made about my comic, my art style, and how I create it. While I don't agree with everything that was said, there was a painful amount of truth to what was said. Enough truth for me to take a good hard look at what I'm doing and start making some changes. Some you would agree with and probably others you wont. I felt the review was on the caustic side, but I'm fine with that. I have a pretty thick skin and can take it. I would however ask that you schedule my site for another review in approximately six month or so. Based on this review I plan on changing and hopefully improving my comic over the course of the next year. My archive will still be there which I'm sure you will hate, but I would be very interested to know what your opinion of the site and the new material would be in the future. Thank you for your time Carter Reid thezombienation.com"

Dear Carter,

We are glad our review helped, and even more glad you will try to improve the comic.

A lot of people misunderstand the purpose of this site. We are not here to make webcomic artist angry, and none of us ever wants to make anyone give up on making art. It is only a desirable result when the person in question can't/refuses to try to and better himself. We hope webcomic artist will understand what they are doing wrong and change, and if not (which is usually the case) that others will learn from their mistakes using these reviews.

But, to answer your question, we will try to find time to look at your comic again in a few months. We will probably not write a second review for the same comic (it's just not a thing that we do + if the comic actually becomes good then the review will just not fit with the rest of the site). Still, we will try to contact you and give you more feed back, and if the comic improves, we might add a disclaimer to the review to reflect that.

Good luck and godspeed.

Didn't Even Bother to Wait for an Actual Review to be Written
A few geniuses didn't even bother to wait for there to be a review about them and a mere thread on our forum was enough to get a response out of them.

Bittersweet Candy Bowl
This comic gets to be in our reaction section twice. But really, it deserves to be here three or four times. Once for when they made a thread about our thread on their forum (the forum itself was recently deleted and I didn't think to save a copy of the thread), once for when the author's husband came to our thread to argue about it before the review was even made, and a third time when he came back again, a year later, after it was.

Hatefarm
Picking up from where they left-off with the utterly awful "Mall Monkeys", this trio now makes a new comic which we have gotten a number of complaints about but have yet to bother reviewing. Still, they cited a thread regarding the comic as a review on their site and said:

"Even though it’s pretty outdated, this is still our favorite example of hating hatefarm. Someone should update it."

I'm not sure if they meant this as a compliment or an insult. Either way, your comic is shit.

The Other Grey Meat
On a thread about our site the creator of this comic posted this, seemingly objective, comment:

Part 1

"It's bullying... Half the junk that they write is pointless bashing. There are some legitimate critiques in there, I'm sure, but it's so wrapped up in derogatory comments that it's going to be lost on a creator anyway. I also have an issue with the fact that their articles tend to be very subjective to the article author's personal tastes."

But all was not as it seems because later he posted this on that same thread:

Part 2

"That's a fair point Cynic. What I meant was that, in specific to our case, someone said "The colour scheme doesn't fit a zombie story." It just showed a general lack of insight into the work that they were trying to rip apart... It should be abundantly clear that a dark, bleak colour scheme would have been completely wrong for our comic.

But honestly, their review of our comic didn't really bother me. It was their review of someone else's comic... I'm not sure if Nightsky is talking about the same person, but it really irritated me.

Their general position that one has to be at a certain level of competence in order to put a webcomic on the internet is one that I am completely opposed to."

So when he says: "It's going to be lost on a creator anyway". He means: "It was lost on me". We hurt his feelings so we are wrong. Also he doesn't understand that all reviews are subjective opinions by default and opposes competence... Actively, it would seem.

Too Much Information
The author of the comic had this to say about the thread that discussed his comic: "I debated whether or not to put up a link to this, but after going over my logs, I seem to have picked up dozens of new readers. So it doesn’t seem anyone else takes them seriously." This post brought on a slew of ass-pats from his fans in the form of long paragraphs about how wrong we are and how amazing his comic is. It was pretty sad to watch. He then continued in the comment section, claiming he gets 500 times more traffic than we do, something that isn't true and was probably even less true before we moved sites, and said the number of new readers he has gotten thanks to us is now 150 compared to 0 for the past 8 years. So I guess someone does take us seriously.

The most hilarious part in all of this was this picture of his face-

--


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