Who Watches the Watchers - Forum for the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe & Similar Works » Additions and Retcons from Reprints/Letter Pages or Outside Sources...

mal32 · 11/23/2021 7:37 am

Like everybody else in this forum, I do love the Marvel Universe, the Marvel Multiverse, the Marvel Megaverse and the Marvel in the Omniverse, so I would like to be able to read not only the "normal" stories Marvel prints in their "normal" series or one-shots but also everything else everybody else adds from sources outside the "normal" Marvel Comic Books, I mean, for example, additions avalaible only in reprints, letter pages, Marvel Characters appearing in comics printed not-by-Marvel, stories from promos/giveaways, the Marvel Cybercomics and other things to add...

About additions avalaible only in reprints we have, for example, MARVEL'S GREATEST COMICS #71 (July, 1971) that reprints FANTASTIC FOUR #89 (August, 1969): in FF#89 Marvel made a mistake because the Thing (Ben Grimm) appeared from page 1 but he wasn't present at the end of #88, so when #89 was reprinted in MGC#71 Marvel rewrote some word balloons to cover this discrepancy (I have read this information the first time in THE OFFICIAL MARVEL INDEX TO THE FANTASTIC FOUR #6 May, 1986)

About letter pages we have, for example, the letter page of FANTASTIC FOUR #204 (March, 1979) that explains (with an image), for the first time, how Mister Fantastic (Reed Richards) escaped Microbe 201-B in the story in #201 (December, 1978), a minor plot element that was inadvertently omitted in that story (I have read this information the first time in THE OFFICIAL MARVEL INDEX TO THE FANTASTIC FOUR #12 January, 1987)

About Marvel Characters appearing in stories printed not-by-Marvel we have, for example, SPECIAL ZEMBLA #152,153 (both January, 2000) in which appears the "INFANT TERRIBLE" alien after FANTASTIC FOUR #24 (March, 1964). Special Zembla was printed by French comics publisher Lug (est. 1950; later renamed Semic; which also published French editions of Marvel Comics between 1968 and the early 1990s)
(I have read this information for the first time in the profile of the INFANT TERRIBLE in the Marvunapp site:
http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix/infanttr.htm
)

My dream is to list here, if possible, whatever has enriched, and enriches, Marvel in whatever possible form, like, to add something else for another example, the Marvel Cybercomics:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvel_CyberComics

and special stories about Marvel Characters from foreign publishers outside the USA, like, for example, the Italian, like me, L'UOMO RAGNO IL SEGRETO DEL VETRO (SPIDER-MAN THE SECRET OF THE GLASS) year 2003
https://spiderfan.org/review/comics/spiderman_secret_glass/segreto_del_vetro.html

Do you agree? Could you help me to add something to this list? I will add more things as soon as my possible

Last edited by mal32 (11/24/2021 2:52 am)

Loki · 11/23/2021 9:25 am

I'm happy with the idea. My only concern is that a forum format might not be the best way to catalogue such things, as it's not easy to trawl through multiple posts to find stuff that's been added more or less randomly as people uncover it. So we might use the forum for people to draw attention to stuff that's been discovered, but need to maintain a list somewhere else that can be added to in a manageable format.

Andy E. Nystrom · 11/23/2021 9:31 am

Great idea for a thread.

One thing that springs to mind (and I'm concerned about listing all cases because it might violate fair use), but the Classic X-Men collections show that for the earliest issues of that reprint series, editing went beyond adding a new backup story and new pages to the main story. Claremont also rewrote numerous panels to clarify things and fix things he had changed his mind about. For example, he changed his mind about Nightcrawler being able to turn invisible in darkness and rewrote a lot of panels to fix that. Though subsequently other writers brought that power back in.

zuckyd1 · 11/23/2021 9:32 am

The first two categories you list —changes in reprints and new info in letter pages—are especially interesting to me. I'd love to see a compilation of such occurrences.

Lonewolf36 · 11/23/2021 3:11 pm

Sounds good to me!

Loki · 11/24/2021 5:50 am

So, if we intend to do this, I think we need to break down the categories (we can always amend or add new ones if we spot a need to do so); we also probably want to maintain lists somewhere that new discoveries can be added to in an organised fashion, the same way new handbook entries might be listed in a post but there's a list they then go onto.

So, categories:
Changes in reprints. Do we want to include UK titles in this? Lots of UK titles rearranged panels or made other subtle and sometimes not so subtle changes, including modifying art, changing text and adding brand new splash pages as one American issue might be split across multiple UK issues. For example, compare and contrast Tales to Astonish I#65/2 and Mighty World of Marvel (UK) #18/1:

You'll notice a couple of differences beyond print quality and some recoloring of uniforms - the second panel has been subtly recropped to remove some of the guy in front's legs, presumably to give more space for the text box where the country the guy is from has been named (and to remove the word paroxysm, presumably because someone thought UK readers might not know it).
Or the next issue of each title, where we've got changes like this:
where the hammer and sickle were considered too jingoistic and so replaced with a more generic lightning bolt.

Or how about these covers? Here's the American edition of Avengers I#18

Here's the Australian reprint, where the Commissar's skin tone has changed and he's a lot more naked:

and here's the UK equivalent, which has a whole new cover and gives the Commissar a name!

And then there were examples like this one - Marvel Team-Up I#65 was reprinted across Super Spider-Man and Captain Britain #646-648, but that necessitated adding some new recap/splash pages with brand new art in some issues, such as this from #647:

Next category: Info revealed in letters or editorial pages, maybe include stuff revealed in interviews or blogs (although these would be with caveats that they are less official as they've not seen print in a Marvel title proper, and might only be the individual's opinion?)

Category 3: Marvel characters making appearances in non-Marvel titles. Split this into official/authorized and unofficial? I'd suggest including unofficial cameos where the character is recognisable but not named, but not ones where it's a pastiche - e.g. we'd include where Peter Parker turns up in Crisis on Infinite Earths, but leave out appearances of "Arachnid-Man." Or at very least we should split pastiches off into a sub-list. Obviously there may be some grey areas in the pastiches that lean closer to being a proper unofficial cameo.

And since they were mentioned:
Category 4 - Marvel titles published outside the normal brand - promotional titles, coloring books that include new art or stories, cybercomics, radio and audio plays, etc. Anything that might not immediately turn up if you looked at a list of titles published by Marvel Comics.

Category 5: Split from category 4, because some were published by Marvel and some weren't - anything that was originally published by Marvel overseas subsidiaries or by overseas licensees - Marvel UK stuff, Spider-Man, X-Men and Hulk mangas, Italian graphic novels, etc. There's other forums that have already done a lot of groundwork on this, but no harm in maintaining a list here - there's always a chance of spotting something others have overlooked.

Andy E. Nystrom · 11/24/2021 7:53 am

A question about the intent of the thread: Are we simply listing all the various changes or ones that actually gives new information (or clarifies/fixes something)? For example a Marvel Tales reprint had Aunt May go from watching the Beverly Hillbillies to Dukes of Hazard, but that's more of a topical reference that doesn't really change what we know about a character (beyond TV viewing preferences) or event.

zuckyd1 · 11/24/2021 1:14 pm

I think perhaps this should be split up into several threads. The changes-in-reprints list alone could get quite lengthy (depending on how exhaustive we wish to make it).

While the change in Aunt May's TV show are rather trivial in terms of the overall story, I find it quite an interesting detail and would like to see similar examples included. We know that later retellings of stories often adjust topical references, but it's interesting to see it done in what is otherwise presented as a direct reprint.

In addition to new splash pages in reprints, we might list collected editions that add brand new pages. Some examples are Cable & New Mutants, Daredevil: Fall From Grace, Fantastic Four: Nobody Gets Out Alive, Havok & Wolverine: Meltdown, Spider-Man: Revelations, and X-Tinction Agenda.

We could also note when a reprint or collected edition drops panels or pages.

When a story from Strange Tales #75 was reprinted in Tomb of Darkness #22, a red-headed scientist named Blake was given blond hair and the more familiar surname Pym.

When a story from Journey into Mystery #81 was reprinted in Where Monsters Dwell #25, villains who were communists in the original version were changed to Hydra agents.

Similarly, when a story from Strange Tales #84 was reprinted in Monsters on the Prowl #24, characters were changed into Hydra and SHIELD agents.

Fantastic Four Special Edition #1 reprints Fantastic Four Annual #1, replacing page 18 with 5 new pages by John Byrne.

Hulk Comic #26 reprints parts of Incredible Hulk #231 and Captain America #230 with new panels of the Watcher looking on.

X-Men Classics #2 adds a new splash plash to its reprinting of X-Men #59.

from the MCP forum:
The "Best of Marvel '96" tpb has a corrected version of "Onslaught: X-Men". The original publication of the issue left out a white overlay in the climax of the issue: as Franklin reaches out to the heroes trapped inside Onslaught, they were SUPPOSED to appear, translucent, over the scene of the shocked X-Men and trashed Central Park. But, the plate got left out and all you see is Franklin reaching into nothing and the X-Men looking at nothing. The corrected splash page was included when the book was collected in "Best of Marvel '96".

There is at least one example of new info from a creator interview being canonized. Bob Layton revealed that Spymaster was trained by Taskmaster, and this was incorporated into Spymaster’s handbook entry.

zuckyd1 · 11/24/2021 1:47 pm

The panels from Tales to Astonish #65 and Mighty World of Marvel #18 posted by Loki bring up the issue of Bodavia. Bodavia was a fictional country that Tony Isabella created for British reprints to replace the Soviet Union.

In the 1970s, in various Marvel reprint titles, references to and symbols of various Communist regimes were removed and replaced with references to and symbols of various fictional evil empires. My memory is that such alterations were reserved for only the most over-the-top and bordering-on-racist depictions of "those stinking commies," but I wouldn't bet the farm on it.
When it comes to comics reprints, I'm something of a purist. Save for correcting coloring and spelling errors, I prefer to see these old stories presented in as close to their original form as possible. Anyway, these changes were the subject of a discussion on one of my mailing lists and I was able to offer the list members some behind the scenes information on same:
This type of thing began in the British weeklies I edited for Marvel in the early 1970s. Our UK partners objected to what they called our "Reds under the bed" stories and wanted us to remove any references to Russia and Red China.
I created a new country--Bodavia--for these reprints. It was so large it encompassed citizens who looked European AND Oriental. It was also utterly evil, sworn to destroy our democratic society. The hammer-and-sickle and red star insignias on aircraft and tanks were replaced by a lightning bolt in a circle or sometimes just a lightning bolt. This didn't satisfy our UK partners entirely, but they stopped bitching and moaning when they realized we wouldn't go any further or skip these stories in the reprint cycle.
Personally, even though I thought the commie menace stories were silly, these changers struck me as even sillier. Had this decision been up to me, I would have told the Brits to go pleasure themselves.

Some examples are:
Journey into Mystery #84, reprinted in Spider-Man Comics Weekly #2
Journey into Mystery #87, reprinted in Spider-Man Comics Weekly #5
Journey into Mystery #117, reprinted in Spider-Man Comics Weekly #38 and 39 (This time Bodavia is taking the place of Vietnam.)

Mentions of Bodavia can be found in American reprints as well:
Adventures in Terror #15, reprinted in Monsters on the Prowl #23
Marvel Tales #117, reprinted in Chamber of Chills #8
Strange Tales #83, reprinted in Where Monsters Dwell#27 (a character’s first name is also changed from Miklos to Michael)
Strange Tales #87, reprinted in Monsters on the Prowl #23

Similarly, when a story from Journey into Mystery #16 was reprinted in Tomb of Darkness #10 North Korea was changed to Mairavia.

Last edited by zuckyd1 (11/24/2021 1:47 pm)

Andy E. Nystrom · 11/24/2021 5:53 pm

One other way things should be broken down (either separate threads or in a list) is standard letter pages retcons/clarifications vs. No-Prize attempts to explain why something isn't a mistake that are approved by the editor. Those are probably semi-official but also usually tongue in cheek. There are probably enough of the latter to warrant a separate section or thread.

mal32 · 11/25/2021 5:52 am

I thank you all because I never thought my idea could be accepted the way you did, thank you very much for it.

About the changing in other editions, reprints or foreign edition, I would prefer we list, in the main list, only the additions/changings that enrich the Marvel Universe, for example the ones addind data and I would put the other changings like the ones about colors and other minor ones in another list, if you agree.

Thank you for all the examples you all added above, I will try to put them all in lists and with time and all together I am sure we will have a magnificent list of lists.

Now I add other two examples:

About new informations in reprints we have MARVEL TALES #9 (July, 1967) that, when reprints the Human Torch (Johnny Storm)'s story from STRANGE TALES #107 (April, 1963), in which he fights against Namor the Sub-Mariner, it adds an editorial special note stating explicitly that "nautical Namor has since lost his power to imitate the characteristics of fish... but, otherwise, he's mighter and more marvelous than ever!" (I have read this information the first time on Sub-Mariner's profile on wikipedia)
This because Namor often showed powers then forgotten by Marvel in the years, here we can read more about it:
https://www.looper.com/172143/the-untold-truth-of-namor-the-sub-mariner/

About new informations in letter pages, we have a lot of them thanks to the never-forgotten Mark Gruenwald's no-prize moments. He "gave" no-prizes to the Marvel readers who not only pointed out an error but also devised a clever explanation as to why it was not really an error, for example in the letter page of CAPTAIN AMERICA #312 (December, 1985) a reader, David, explained why the shrinking gas of Doctor Malus didn't shrink Armadillo in the story from CAPTAIN AMERICA #308 (August, 1985).

Let me know what you think, I really wish this become a great page...

mal32 · 11/27/2021 2:47 am

I would like to add a few things:

1) I love the idea of listing here all and every new informations/illustrations/data from the UK Editions of the Marvel stories. For example, often, there is new material in the MARVEL UK ANNUALS...

2) about the above MARVEL'S GREATEST COMICS v1 #71/FANTASTIC FOUR v1 #89, Marvel changed some word balloons also in MARVEL'S GREATEST COMICS #70 (May, 1971) that reprints FANTASTIC FOUR #88 (July, 1969), see, for example the fourth panel of page 16 of FF#70

Last edited by mal32 (11/27/2021 3:00 am)

zuckyd1 · 11/27/2021 12:47 pm

When a story from Strange Tales #97 was reprinted in Marvel Tales #83, the blurb on the splash page was changed to highlight the uncanny similarity of two of the story's characters to Peter Parker's aunt and uncle, who would make their debut two months after the Strange Tales issue.

Andy E. Nystrom · 11/27/2021 3:58 pm

From the top of my head:

Lots of 1970s and 1980s reprints had an "Originally Presented In..." caption, and cross-references to already reprinted stories would direct to the recent reprint instead of the original.

Many Essential volumes of course remove the colour. I know that some of the Essential reprints that were originally B&W had nudity panels altered.

Dr. Droom stories from Amazing Adventures were heavily altered when reprinted in Weird Wonder Tales.

For a time, reprints of Incredible Hulk #1 would recolour the Hulk green. I recall that a hardcover that also reprinted a Stern story focussing on Doc Samson entering Banner and Hulk's psyche was one such case. This practice of course stopped once the grey Hulk was brought back into continuity.

mal32 · 11/29/2021 4:34 am

Another beautiful example of the Marvel Universe/Multiverse being enriched is from ACTION FORCE (WEEKLY) #17 (June, 21st 1987) in which they say that Quick Kick (MacArthur S. Ito) had been trained by Shang-Chi... Action Force is the UK Version of G.I. Joe and both are in the Marvel Megaverse but also, like this time, in the Marvel Multiverse (Earth-120185)

zuckyd1 · 12/03/2021 2:13 pm

I seem to remember hearing that Allan Heinberg sometimes revises the dialog in his comics (Young Avengers?) when they are published in collected form.

mal32 · 8/20/2022 8:18 am

In The Incredible Hulk #235 (May 1979)'s letters column it was explained, in greater detail, the exact nature of how Moonstone II (Karla Sofen) acquired the moonstone gem from Moonstone I (Lloyd Bloch)

zuckyd1 · 11/26/2023 10:14 am

One problem with citing reprints in place of the original is that the citation would frequently need to change as new omnibuses, epic collections, masterworks, etc. get released.

Andy E. Nystrom · 11/26/2023 11:13 am

zuckyd1 wrote:
One problem with citing reprints in place of the original is that the citation would frequently need to change as new omnibuses, epic collections, masterworks, etc. get released.

The one area where a reprint citation would make sense is if the reprint actually changed something. However, where reprints change things, it's usually pretty minor and not all that noteworthy, like as mentioned earlier May Parker being a fan of the Dukes of Hazzard.

mal32 · 3/08/2024 8:37 am

May I ask who owns THE LIFE OF CAPTAIN MARVEL 1990 reprint? I have the Italian Edition and I need to ask something about the Original USA edition, thanks
https://marvel.fandom.com/wiki/Life_of_Captain_Marvel_TPB_Vol_1

Last edited by mal32 (3/08/2024 8:38 am)

Andy E. Nystrom · 5/16/2024 5:37 am

NexusOfNightmares wrote:
Why do the Handbooks and the Unofficial Appendix still cite the original source material instead of re-printed ones? Wouldn't it be smarter to cite re-prints since they're technically "replacing" the original ones?

Well, the Handbooks no longer have bibliographies though they still use First Appearance/First Active on the rare times that we still get a new one. It's probably a simple matter that the original source has more historical value than any reprints derive from that source; if a character first appeared in 1963, that's more interesting than saying they first appeared in a story that was reprinted in 2024. Plus it saves a lot of time because there can be multiple reprints to try to track, sometimes simultaneously.

If you are talking about instances where retcons occur, the Handbooks already do tackle those as best they can while still acknowledging the original sources. For example, a typical Dr. Druid profile lists his first appearance as both Dr. Droom and Dr. Druid but then focuses solely on the Druid version for his History.

Andy E. Nystrom · 5/16/2024 5:43 am

NexusOfNightmares wrote:
What about the Appendix?

Probably same as above, with any retcons more significant than, say, May Parker's viewing habits discussed in the Comments directly below the profiles. From what I've read of the Appendix profiles, the participants are good at listing anything potentially problematic.

zuckyd1 · 5/16/2024 7:38 am

It's true that the Appendix site, not being a print document, is more easily updatable to account for the latest printing. But I'm not really sure what would be the point of doing so. Particularly in the case of first appearances.
Spider-Man's FIRST appearance was in Amazing Fantasy #15 in 1962.
It was not in Marvel Tales Annual #1 in 1964. Or Origins of Marvel Comics in 1974. Or Marvel Tales #137 in 1982. Or Marvel Masterworks Vol. 1 in 1987 (reprinted as Marvel Masterworks: Amazing Spider-Man Vol. 1 in 2002). Or Spider-Man Classics #1 in 1993. Or the Very Best of Spider-Man in 1994. Or Essential Spider-Man Vol. 1 in 1996. Or The 100 Greatest Marvels of All Time #10 in 2001. Or Fantastic Firsts in 2002. Or Marvel Visionaries: Stan Lee in 2005. Or Amazing Fantasy Omnibus in 2007 (reprinted in 2019). Or Amazing Spider-Man Omnibus Vol. 1 in 2007 (reprinted in 2013, 2016, 2019, and 2022). Or Marvel Firsts: The 1960s in 2011. Or Amazing Spider-Man Epic Collection: Great Power in 2014 (reprinted in 2020 and 2022). Or Marvel 75th Anniversary Omnibus in 2014. Or Mighty Marvel Masterworks: The Amazing Spider-Man Vol. 1 in 2021. And so on.
Although his origin story has certainly been embellished in later retellings, nothing in that original story was changed in its later reprintings.

Last edited by zuckyd1 (5/16/2024 7:38 am)

zuckyd1 · 5/16/2024 12:35 pm

NexusOfNightmares wrote:
mal32 wrote:
May I ask who owns THE LIFE OF CAPTAIN MARVEL 1990 reprint? I have the Italian Edition and I need to ask something about the Original USA edition, thanks
https://marvel.fandom.com/wiki/Life_of_Captain_Marvel_TPB_Vol_1
I don't condone piracy but
[redacted by zuckyd1]

Please don't post links to pirated material in the public forums. While I'm not condoning sending links via private message either, what you do there is beyond anyone else's control.

zuckyd1 · 5/16/2024 1:01 pm

NexusOfNightmares wrote:
The point of re-prints over time is to make changes to comics (e.g. retconning information, removing problematic scenes from the past). Amazing Fantasy #15 was at one point canon in Spider-Man's history but if you were to read it today, then yes, you would read Mighty Marvel Masterworks: The Amazing Spider-Man Vol. 1, not Amazing Fantasy 15.

I disagree. The point of reprints is to provide an affordable copy in cases where acquiring the original would be prohibitively expensive, or to provide a hardcover or trade collection that can be stored and displayed on a bookshelf or that might be a person's preferred way of reading or traveling with the stories. Plus of course there is the purpose of earning the publisher more money.
Reprints do occasionally contain corrections or updated information—sometimes even entire new pages. But most of the time they don't. If issues were only reprinted to change information, then Masterworks/Epics/Omnibuses wouldn't reprint complete runs of a series—they'd only print those issues that need "correcting".
You are correct, most people today who want to read Spider-Man's first story would not read Amazing Fantasy #15. But that is probably because they don't own Amazing Fantasy #15, can't afford it, and wouldn't read it even if they did own it for fear of damaging it and thus lowering its value.
Amazing Fantasy #15 keep getting reissued every few years not because it's more frequently in need of correction than other old issues, but because it's an incredibly important and popular story. Whether one owns the Omnibus, Masterwork, Epic or Mighty Masterwork version is sometimes the result of which version is most recent, and is sometimes the result of how one prefers to read comics—as expensive oversized heavy hardcovers, as cheaper more easily transportable softcovers, etc.

Andy E. Nystrom · 5/16/2024 6:05 pm

zuckyd1 wrote:
Please don't post links to pirated material in the public forums. While I'm not condoning sending links via private message either, what you do there is beyond anyone else's control.

I concur. If Marvel opts to post something online for free or if Marvel approves a sneak preview on Amazon, it's okay to post a link to those. A link to a site that has a single page would probably also be fine because that would qualify as fair use. But no links to sites that post entire issue without the consent of the publisher (or creator if creator owned).

Andy E. Nystrom · 5/16/2024 6:30 pm

NexusOfNightmares wrote:
First appearance is different since that's when they were first published IRL. Peter Parker's first appearance was in Amazing Fantasy, but that's not his first appearance chronologically. Doctor Strange and Nightmare both originally appeared in Strange Tales 110 but implied since their first issue that they had been battling long before then.

I think it's important to distinguish First Appearance and chronologically earliest appearance though they can sometimes be one and the same, e.g. Franklin Richards. Retcons can and have added to Spider-Man's back story prior to Amazing Fantasy #15, but the first time that Peter Parker's adventures saw print, save perhaps in an ad, was Amazing Fantasy #15 and that's far more significant than any retconned earlier adventure.

NexusOfNightmares wrote:
The point of re-prints over time is to make changes to comics (e.g. retconning information, removing problematic scenes from the past). Amazing Fantasy #15 was at one point canon in Spider-Man's history but if you were to read it today, then yes, you would read Mighty Marvel Masterworks: The Amazing Spider-Man Vol. 1, not Amazing Fantasy 15.

Did the Masterworks volume change anything other than the colouring? Regardless it doesn't change that AF #15 was where he first appeared and even if there were nip/tucks, you can still draw a line from AF #15 to his most recent adventures.

And while not entirely unknown, it's extremely rare for reprints to change details. For example, I'm currently reading New Mutants Omnibus Vol. 2 (or rereading if you count the fact that I read the stories in "floppies" decades ago). Near the start of the volume there's a disclaimer that the stories have racist elements that are left intact for historical reasons (I don't think that Claremont is a Klansman, just someone who stumbled a bit trying to be well intentioned). The paper is better, the colours are brighter, and there are no ads, but otherwise they are the exact same stories I bought in my teen years.

mal32 · 5/18/2024 7:57 am

zuckyd1 wrote:
NexusOfNightmares wrote:
mal32 wrote:
May I ask who owns THE LIFE OF CAPTAIN MARVEL 1990 reprint? I have the Italian Edition and I need to ask something about the Original USA edition, thanks
https://marvel.fandom.com/wiki/Life_of_Captain_Marvel_TPB_Vol_1
I don't condone piracy but
[redacted by zuckyd1]
Please don't post links to pirated material in the public forums. While I'm not condoning sending links via private message either, what you do there is beyond anyone else's control.

I am sorry. I thought that that site was an approved site, sorry, I will avoid to do it in the future. Forgive me, please.

Andy E. Nystrom · 5/18/2024 8:04 am

mal32 wrote:
I am sorry. I thought that that site was an approved site, sorry, I will avoid to do it in the future. Forgive me, please.

Your Marvel fandom link is fine because that's Marvel's own site. zuckyd1 removed the bad link before I saw it, but it context the link, posted by Nexus was apparently a link to one of the sites that are intended solely as a means of posting pirated issues of comics. Most comics related sites online are fine, just not ones devoted to piracy (sites devoted to comics about pirates are fine though; arr!).

Andy E. Nystrom · 5/18/2024 5:28 pm

NexusOfNightmares wrote:
I'm really sorry about that. It won't happen again. Normally, I wouldn't have promoted it, but I justified it in a sick, twisted kind of way because I was giving it to someone who wanted a copy of an old comic they didn't have.

Not a problem. We're pretty forgiving here except for Spambots.