Sigvald's universe

[Kai Saarto]

Daniel van Eijmeren wrote:

>>I'm seeing a tendency where some people attack Sigvald every time 
>>he writes anything by giving his words the worst possible meaning. 
>>    
>>
>
>Please, Kai. When Sigvald writes something, his words often already 
>*have* the worst possible meaning!
>
*chuckles*  At least we often interpret it that way, since he's been 
known to irritate with his strong opinions.

>I understand your email, but I object against victimizing Sigvald. 
>People have had an enormous lot of patience with him. For months. 
>Sigvald has got lots of chances, and he *still* gets chances. But he 
>just keeps going on with forcing Don Rosa's name into discussions, 
>almost as if he's being paid for it.
>
I wonder who would pay Sigvald? Probably those two ex-managers of Carl 
Barks - I guess they hate Don enough. Sigvald is doing such a bad job at 
promoting Don that merely introducing oneself as a Rosa-fan almost gives 
you a label of fanaticism. Such fanatical approach to Rosa gives him and 
all us his other fans in this list a bad name. Fanaticism to *anything* 
is something I really don't understand or approve, since it often means 
you're anti-something as well. My guess is that many members who respond 
fiercely to Sigvald's views are starting to become a bit anti-Rosa as 
well.... simply because Sigvald gets to their nerves with his messages.  
This is not good at all.

>So, I don't want to hear anything like "please people, don't be so 
>hard on Sigvald". That's putting the situation upside down, IMO.
>  
>
That was not what I was trying to say. I don't like Sigvald forcing his 
opinions any more than you do. I'm just saying that the time trying to 
"set him right" might be used better. Or it would be better to do this 
privately. This public arguing is giving everyone a bad name. I know 
that Sigvald is usually the source of all the fighting, but the people 
who frequently respond to him are getting a certain reputation as well. 
Some are starting to sound anti-Rosa as well as anti-Sigvald  - and that 
worries me.  Let's see what Katie said:

>Katie Sullivan wrote:
>
>Exactly.  I absolutely adore Rosa's work, but other discussions
>are fun, too, and I'm certainly not going to protest if his name
>doesn't come up in every single digest!  Besides, it's gotten to
>the point where I'm hesitant to mention his work or "universe"
>in discussions for fear of sounding like a certain other member
>who's gotten a lot of people's hackles up.  I'd like to be able
>to mention Rosa in a positive way without causing the impression
>that I share some of the extreme, and at times inflammatory,
>opinions offered by another member. 

Well said! Rosa's name is starting sound like curse and that's just plain wrong. Don does not deserve this. He isn't behind Sigvald's views, nor does he ever self-promote himself. I'd like to see him in the list more often, but he has to be extremely careful with everything he says. With the current atmosphere in this list its just not that much fun to follow discussions. Every time when subject line includes words like "Rosa", "Barks" or "canon" I cringe when clicking it open, afraid of what it might contain.