This will no doubt be described as a 'personal attack' by the individual concerned, but it's actually nothing more than a justifiable response to someone by the name of
MICHAEL HILL, who seems to have a fondness for misrepresenting (and outright distorting) facts, instead preferring to veer off into fantasy in his rabid attempts to impose his view of things on the rest of comics fandom. I'm not necessarily describing his rationalisation for vilifying one of the chief architects of the
MARVEL AGE, but rather his way of dismissing those who don't share his views.
A few posts back, I republished an old piece about
STAN LEE,
JACK KIRBY, and
STEVE DITKO. You can read it
here, and I would ask you to pay particular attention to the comments section, and specifically the submissions of Mr.
MICHAEL HILL, who absurdly accused me of being 'disingenuous', 'moving the goalposts', and all sorts of other skulduggery, all the while maintaining throughout his arrogant and disrespectful accusations that he was engaging in a civil debate. Clearly his idea of civility is different from mine.
Then someone calling himself 'TRUTH' left a comment taking a little dig at me. I clicked on the name and the Blogger Profile it took me to was that of Michael Hill. He appears to have changed the name on his comment before submitting it, but had carelessly neglected to change the name on the Profile linked to it. When I clicked on the name of a comment submitted under his own name, it likewise linked to the very same Blogger Profile (Michael Hill's), exactly the same in every detail (set up date and number of visits) as the one linked to 'Truth's' name.
Access to the Blogger Profile linked to both names (Truth and Michael Hill) has now been removed, as you'll discover if you click on them, doubtless a pathetic attempt to try and cover the trail back to his door. Too late! He now denies that Truth was him, thus ironically proving that he is indeed a stranger to the truth, but not in the way that he intended.
When someone goes to such extremes, they demolish any shred of credibility they may have (even if only in their imagination) and stand revealed as someone who simply can't be trusted. He is now trying to bluff it out, claiming that someone else must have used his Blogger account, which he claims not to have used in years. However, all his comments to this blog are submitted from his Blogger account, which, as far as I understand, he has to sign-in to in order to do that. (I know I have to.)
So, as to who did exactly what in the
Stan,
Jack, and
Steve controversy, well - that's still a matter of hotly-contested opinion, and each man is entitled to his own view on the subject. However, on the question of disingenuity, moving the goalposts, distortion, fabrication, and outright lying, there's no doubt as to who did that on my earlier post - that was
Mr. Michael Hill, whose meagre shred of credibility (if indeed he had any) is now in tatters.
Well done, Mr. Hill - the best 'own goal' I've ever witnessed.
******
Perhaps Mr. Hill would like to properly explain and demonstrate the method by which someone could 'hijack' his Blogger Profile. Also, he should complain to the relevant channels about his alleged 'identity theft' and ask them to investigate and identify the culprit - there must be a trail. I certainly have nothing to fear from such an investigation -
him, on the other hand... He should either put up or shut up! But he won't, will he? Nah!
Hello Kid, If you go to http://terranova47.tumblr.com and go back three weeks you will find some original Marvel artwork from a recent exhibit at The Society of Illustrators in New York.
ReplyDeleteTa, T47, I'll take a look right now.
ReplyDeleteYup, some nice stuff there sure enough. I've got the Captain America comic and, I think, the Not Brand Echh one.
ReplyDeleteDrat, no response from Michael?
ReplyDeleteI was looking forward to some good old mud-slinging.
Nobody does an online slug-fest like you, Kid!
I think he finally realised that his absurd claims about 'identity theft' didn't bear scrutiny, CJ, and is lying low. As well he should.
ReplyDeleteKid, I don’t get any respect. I was a victim of identity theft. They called to weeks later. They wanted to give it back!
ReplyDeleteThat reminds me of the time I was kidnapped, BP. After a week, the kidnappers 'phoned my parents and asked them how much money they wanted to take me back.
ReplyDeleteYou know like all those times politicians post ludicrous conspiracy theories online and are hacked only after the fact? Much like my Facebook .... it wasn’t me it was the cat. It was a joke. Why are you so sensitive. It’s your fault. Look at that car wreck over there ....
ReplyDeleteOne's thing for sure, PS - his failure to respond speaks volumes. If I genuinely thought my identity had been stolen and used for nefarious purposes, there's no way I'd shut up about it. Nor would I rest 'til I'd done everything to try and find out who the culprit was.
ReplyDeleteThe First Law of Online Arguments states that if you don't get a reply, you've won.
ReplyDeleteI know that, cos I just made it up.
He's doing a sneaky thing over on the Snyder-Ditko Appreciation Facebook page by claiming that I didn't answer his points, but attacked him instead. He seems to think that if he repeats how he wants things to be (rather than they actually are), then it becomes fact. Curiously, he's gone quiet on the identity theft claim. We all know why, don't we?
ReplyDelete