Keskustelujen arkisto

> From: "Daniel van Eijmeren" <dve at kabelfoon.nl>
> So, I really don't see why Don Rosa finds it nescessary to send me a
> private email in which he misinterprets me, including an attempt to
> personally insult me and a suggestion about how to apologize to
> Dan Shane. It's none of his business!

The hell you say! And here you are, as always, FURTHER complicating
the whole matter by making it public! Jeez, you just don't know when to
stop or when people are trying to help you deal with your own emotional
problems! My private mail was to try to KEEP THIS PRIVATE. Don't you get
it!? Okay, so you force this on me:
Daniel could have made that apology as soon as he sent the message to the
list, but I waited and he did not do so. I sent him a PRIVATE mail (yes,
private, to allow him to seem to decide to make his own apology... I could
have done so publicly but chose not to) telling him I knew that he had
mistakenly sent that message, and that it was, after all, in Dutch, so I
expected him to apologize to the ML *only in Dutch* so as to not embarrass
himself further. He ignored that message for two days. I then asked him
again, and said that if he did not apologize to Dan Shane in Dutch, I would
need to defend Dan against being insulted, and I would not be able to do so
in Dutch. I suggested he take my advice. So, he does not take my advice,
and he makes matters worse for himself.
Many of you know how Daniel resents my presence here and feels that I
should not be on-line in this group because my very presence "forbids"
criticism of me. I actually, like an idiot, once accepted this as truth for
some months, and quit the group -- but I later realized that Daniel's
resentment was *his* problem and I would not allow it to cut *me* off from
my fellow Barksfans. I knew my return irritated him, but that was something
he'd need to deal with. I knew that he resented my popularity (as much as
my popularity puzzles me) but I decided to just ignore him. And I try to
ignore the swipes he takes at me when I express my personal opinions
here -- I know he has personal problems with it.
But it's rather bothersome to know that he seems to enjoy seeing a crank
write in to this list with what even *Daniel* should know are lies, and the
fact that he feels that my friend's defending me when I am not here to do
so myself is "childish" is okay. That's his personal opinion and it's none
of my business. But when he places that opinion in public view, I MUST
respond. My choice was to try to allow Daniel to apologize for the error in
such a way that no one but Dutch speakers would even know what was going
on, therefore making it invisible to all other eyes. This seemed to be the
kindest way to handle it. But no -- he forces me to respond directly. Okay.
If it's "childish" for a friend to try to defend someone who he sees
slandered viciously in public, especially when that person is absent and
not able to respond himself... if that's childish, then I'm a child and
proud of it! Dan didn't even directly address the libelous remarks, he did
not seek to argue or start a flamewar (which have been absent from this ML
since its very beginning) -- he simply suggested the crank's sloppy writing
spoke for itself and that we should all simply ignore it. It was a very
reserved response, but all that was needed. It was clear that this person
was not expressing an honest opinion, he was simply trying to slander me.
Dan Shane is supposed to just let that pass while I'm off in Norway?
Apparently Daniel was upset that someone tried to defend me against
criticism, even though I was not here and the attack was clearly a pack of
lies. And here Daniel jumps on me whenever I simply express an opinion ,
not even a criticism, of something Carl Barks was thinking when he wrote
something. This is really sad.
All I can say is that neither I nor (I trust) Dan Shane nor (I hope) anyone
else here is going to change how they decide to defend their friends or
their ideas just to please Daniel. And I suggest Daniel take advice given
to him by me or others about how to handle these matters in a saner manner
and not force us all to air all this crap in the open. This ML is not the
place for it! Why did I send him private mail? This is why! Because it
would have avoided ALL OF THIS! Who needs this #@&%? Not me! We could have
avoided all of it.
Aside from that, I also thank all of you for the kind words you said in my
defense against that crank message. And I especially thank DAN SHANE. I'll
take all the "childish" friends I can get if they are like Dan Shane, or
Nils or Oystein or Elli or Michael or Luca or Frank or ***ALL*** the other
friends I've met through Barks' Ducks over the years! And I'll be
"childish" for all of you when you are slandered in your absence.

I have been wanting to say this for a while.
I am not American but I do very much believe in the American bill of rights,
to me it is the only time the true meaning of freedom has been put on paper.

1st Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging
the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the
people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for
a redress of grievances.

5th Amendment
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or
otherwise infamous, crime, unless on a presentment or indictment
of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval
forces, or in the militia, when in actual service, in time of
war, or public danger; nor shall any person be subject, for the
same offence, to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor
shall be compelled, in any criminal case, to be a witness against
himself; nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without
due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for
public use, without just compensation.

Which mean that every one here has the right to say what they want or not
say anything.
To any one that dose not agree with that you do not understand what it is to
be a free man.
I hope every body understands this.

Kenneth
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

I can't help responding to this, if only to clear up some facts.

Don Rosa wrote (to Dani?l):

> Jeez, you just don't know when to
> stop or when people are trying to help you deal with your own
> emotional problems!

Dani?l phoned me about this. He mentioned your private mails. He didn't
understand why you insisted that his apology should be in Dutch. Your mail
looked much more like a threat to him than a help.

> Daniel could have made that apology as soon as he sent the
> message to the list, but I waited and he did not do so.

Dani?l only noticed his mistake after the digest appeared. He asked me what
to do, and *I* advised him to wait for another day, since that particular
day was Barks' birthday. I thought it would not be fitting to discuss a
quarrel on such a special day.
If that left you or Dan in expectance too long: I'm sorry.

> My choice was to try to allow Daniel to apologize
> for the error in
> such a way that no one but Dutch speakers would even know
> what was going
> on, therefore making it invisible to all other eyes.

I think it's more polite to translate the whole message in public, than to
send another gibberish message to DCML, thereby puzzling all 200+ readers
(except a handfull of Dutchmen and Belgians) *twice*.
Besides that, I think a lot of people understood the meaning of Dani?l's
message anyway.

Now let me get back to discussing the comics. This DCML was meant to be
*fun*.

--Harry.

From: "Olivier" <mouse-ducks at wanadoo.fr>
(Actually quoting another questioner.)
>>Are the characters in Barks's tree in CBL drawn?

Barks' family tree was something he did for his own private notes for his
own reference, and as such did not include drawings. It was simply a list
of about 10 names with lines drawn between them.

>>In the original version of Don Rosa's D94121, what are the differences
between Huey, Dewey and
Louie?

That was my lame "An Eye for Detail" story. What are you asking? There were
actually NO differences between (among) the Nephews that the readers could
see, only Donald. That was the "gag". Or are you asking what the
differences were that Donald claimed to see?

> "It is a sad comment that Carl's birthday went, to my
> knowledge, unnoticed here."
>
> "Here" definitely did *not* mean the DCML! "Here"
> meant the USA, especially regarding the "main-stream"
> media. I was not thinking of the "virtual here" but
> rather the "real world here". Is that
> understandable???

I realize it's rather a poor substitute for CNN or The New York Times, but
the Carl Barks Centennial certainly did NOT go unnoticed in the U.S.-based
"Today in Toons" (URL below), a feature of "Don Markstein's Toonopedia(tm)"
(http://www.toonopedia.com). In fact, knowing it was coming up was a great
spur to getting the entire Toonopedia(tm) on-line in time to note it.

I also used the occasion to launch a whole new Toonopedia(tm) section, "The
People Behind the Toons", which as yet has only one entry
(http://www.toonopedia.com/barks.htm).

Quack, Don

Today in Toons: Every day's an anniversary. What's today?
http://www.toonopedia.com/today.htm

"Now let me get back to discussing the comics. This DCML was meant to be
*fun*." ? Harry Fluks.

First off, I'd like to compliment Harry on such a great quote! Change "DCML"
to "Life" and you have a pretty good philosophy for living!

Hi, I'm Janet Gilbert, and I've been writing Disney Comics since 1990.
Since then, I've had the good fortune of meeting many of you in person. I
was a member of the mailing list a few years back, but just couldn't keep up
with it then.

It's great to be back and see a few familiar names and lots of new ones.
I've been enjoying your shares (especially the various website links) and
hope to participate in the future. My dear sweet hubby Michael, who also
does Disney Comics, will be checking in from time to time, too.

Cheers and a big "Quack" from Janet and Michael in Eugene, Oregon

"Now let me get back to discussing the comics. This DCML was meant to be
*fun*." ? Harry Fluks.

Although, sadly, in the US Carl's passing and his 100th anniversary date did go unnoticed, there have been a few references to Carl recently. At the year end television program on CBS reflecting on those celebrities who died during the year 2000 short cameos of Schulz and Barks were featured. In the latest American Heritage magazine there is a two page article about Uncle Scrooge and Carl.

Sorry, about the reply, I accidently sent my first answer only to Gary, and
when I fixed it, I made a mistake....(sorry Gary for getting 3 mails from
me!)

>All I know for certain is that Steve Geppi has been wrangling this
> >stubborn dogie for nigh over two years now, and his determination shows
> >no sign of flagging

Anyways, what I meant to say is, Last night I coincidently ran into Steve
Geppi at a restaurant and had a very nice conversation with him about Carl
Barks (I am very grateful to Mr. Geppi because back in 1996 he threw a 95th
birthday exhibit for Carl here in Baltimore and gave me an oppurtunity to
actually meet the duckman himself. I was only 13 then, and it was one of the
most thrilling moments of my life). It was very sad though, hearing Steve
talk about how he'd hoped to throw another party for Carl's 100th
birthday...sigh....Well, I asked him how his struggle for the Disney
liscense was going, and he said that it was in the final stages. It sounds
very hopeful to me, so English-speaking only fans take heart!

rebecca ridout
(who goes to school in the city that may soon be the home of the new english
disney comics!)
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com